Podcast appearances and mentions of michael foucault

Another year, another birthday episode for our biggest fan Kellee; however, we are upset this year that Bilson did not DM Brandon to tell him we need Kellee on. But regardless, she's here, and talking about her favorite topics: movies, soccer, crossdressing, and Shakespeare. Join us as we dive into the career of the wickedly talented Amanda Bynes as she pretends to be her brother in order to play soccer. How many of the movies that we watch and review does Kellee actually watch? What is a friendectomy? And how often is Seth talking about French philosopher Michael Foucault? Tune in this week to find out all this and more, but only on "The Good, The Bad, & The Movies"! P.S. Check out these links below to stay connected with TGTBTM: Discord: https://discord.gg/rKuMYcKv Youtube: https://youtu.be/gJxodJ8KKgU --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/tgtbtm/message

Seguimos investigando algunos aspectos del pensamiento de Michael Foucault, en este capítulo hablaremos de su concepción del poder, del panóptico, de la peste, de la sociedad disciplinaria...

TicsaicaacarBienvenidos a la nueva temporada de Metamorfosis, un podcast con información para desarrollar pensamiento crítico y mejorar nuestra toma de decisiones, por ende, calidad de vida. En esta ocasión, presento el primer podcast de la nueva temporada, donde hablamos acerca de ¿qué es El Poder? El poder entre más refinado y sutil, más poderoso. Adéntrate en las discusiones de Michael Foucault y Byung Chul Han para entender de qué manera y qué mecanismos utiliza el Poder para su ejecución. Porque como dice Foucault , EL PODER no es algo que se posee, es algo que se ejerce. Te invito a que conozcas y participes en mis redes sociales:

As a jumping off point for this episode, I offer up for your consideration 'Jesus and John Wayne among the Deplorables' by Michael Young. Published March 11th at American Reformer, the subject of the book review is a title from last summer by Kristin Kobes Du Mez, 'Jesus and John Wayne: How White Evangelicals Corrupted a Faith and Fractured a Nation.' With a name like that, you can't but help tip your hat. Putting Christ and the Duke together is a sure-fire way to get people's attention. But the subtitle contains the substance, and herein lies the rub - like when you find out that the real-life actor and comedian who plays Ron Swanson is not actually a conservative. How precisely white Evangelicals are alleged by Du Mez to have corrupted the Christian faith and fractured America I mean to find out in more detail when I soon read her book in its entirety. But for this episode in the meantime we can work off Michael Young's review. The long and short of it is that American Christianity needs deconstructing. Oh, we've got trouble, right here in River City. It starts with a P and it ends with -atriarchy. One gets the distinct impression that we are being told to never mind what the Bible says. And listen to Michael Foucault instead. We've all been reading and studying and teaching and applying the Scriptures wrong all this time. And that is the fault of Emperor Constantine and the Council of Nicaea and over a millennium-and-a-half of truth claims disguising repressive power plays by men. Scandal after scandal among conservative culture warriors in American Evangelicalism, culminating in the majority of American Evangelicals voting for Donald Trump in 2016 and 2020 - it all adds up to one thing. We are to believe that our Christianity is rotten to the core. We thought we were striving for sound doctrine and careful exegesis. What really happened was that women and minorities were being kept down all this time by straight white men pursuing sex and power, cloaking their selfish ambition in a lot of fine-sounding talk about Jesus which they really didn't mean, and therefore we shouldn't either. Once again, what is needed with the deconstructionists is to deconstruct their deconstructionism. When we do this, what we find is a direct line of thought back to Jean-Jacques Rousseau who worked from the premise that "Man is born free, but everywhere is in chains." This for its part led to the deeply-held conviction many of us now cling stubbornly to that authentic self-expression is the greatest good we can pursue. This in turn leads to one inescapable conclusion that we are inherently good, not born with a sinful nature which we must be saved from by the Almighty. Furthermore, we find also if we go even farther back the original question from the serpent to the first woman Eve. "Hath God said?" But suppose the answer to the question is in the affirmative and God hath said. What then? Put simply, sometimes then we will just argue ourselves in circles that we can only understand what God said rightly if we have the Devil translate and interpret the plain meaning for us. And then we write books like 'Jesus and John Wayne.' --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/garrett-ashley-mullet/message Support this podcast: https://anchor.fm/garrett-ashley-mullet/support

Eskilerin kutsal inek diye tanıdığı yazar Ayşe Aslı Bozdağ ile kendine dürüstlüğüne hayran bırakan, beyni çeke çeke 4 yana açan bir sohbet... @ayseaslibozdag Önerdiği yazar & kitaplar Jiddu Krishnamurti Devlet - Eflatun Amak-ı Hayal - Ahmed Hilmi Kelimeler ve Şeyler - Michael Foucault  İlahi Aşk - William C. Chittick Kadın kadının dostu, kadın kadının kayasıdır! Bana ulaşın Instagram @gizemdemirel info@gizemvatandost.com Hiwell'e sponsorlukları için teşekkür ederim.  www.hiwellapp.com  

In this episode Claudia speaks to Philip Howell about urban animal history. Together they discuss the significance of geography in prying apart the many histories of animals, how attention to animal stories gives one a better appreciation for ‘the urban' and challenges humanist ideas of history. They also touch on the stimulating experience of searching for, finding, and trying to understand animals in the archives.   Date recorded: 20 April 2021 Philip Howell is a lecturer in the Department of Geography at the University of Cambridge, UK. He is an historical and cultural geographer, and has written about the regulation of sexuality in Victorian Britain, and on the relations between literature and geography. But for 20 years he has been researching “animal geography,” focusing on the place of the dog in Victorian society, but also taking in the politics of animals in contemporary society. Find out more about Philip here and you can reach him via email (pmh1000@cam.ac.uk) Featured: Flush and the Banditti: Dog-stealing in Victorian London; At Home and Astray; Animal History in the Modern Cityby Philip Howell; The curious case of the Croydon cat-killer: producing predators in the multi-species metropolis; Black Protest and the Man on Horseback: Race, Animality, and Equestrian Counter-Conduct by Philip Howell and Ilanah Taves; Animal Spaces, Beastly Places: New Geographies of Human-animal Relations edited by Chris Philo and Chris Wilbert; The Urbanization of the Eastern Grey Squirrel in the United States by Etienne Benson; About LookingJohn Berger; Foucault and Animals by Dinesh Wadiwel and Matthew Chrulew; La Vie Des Hommes Infämes by Michael Foucault.  The Animal Turn is part of the  iROAR, an Animals Podcasting Network and can also be found on A.P.P.L.E, Twitter, and Instagram

Hanımlar müjde, siz de evdeki malzemelerle kendi cinsel devriminizi yapmak istemez misiniz? Eski kocanızı (yenisi de olur) getirin, vibratörü götürün! Çünkü Leyloş, “bunların hala tabu olması inanılır gibi değil” diyerek yola çıktı ve yürek yediği bu bölümde cinsellikten bahsetmenin cesaret gerektirmediği bir geleceğin tohumlarını ekiyor.    Bu bölümde neler var: Michael Foucault, ergenlikle maruz kalınan slutshaming, katillerin “eskorttu” diyerek aklanmaya çalışması, Karadeniz saha çalışması, ev hanımlarının yok sayılan libidosu, Hakan Hepcan'ın seks hikayeleri, Konya Swinger çetesi, Tarabyada uşaklar vs. Etilerde yumuşaklar, Teoman'ın seks üzerine kurulu kariyeri, politikaya yön veren seks kasetleri, NEZ, Tarkan ve Nil Karaibrahimgil'in bizi özgürlüğe inandırıp çoluk çocuğa karışması, İbrahim Erkal'ın Canısı klip çekiminde Emine Ün'ü tokatlayarak bayıltması, Katatonia, ağdacılar vs. lazerciler, kadın doğumcuların muayene sırasında “evli misin?” diye sorması, Ankara'nın kaç günlük suyu kaldı ve robotlar yerimizi alacak mı sorularına sürpriz cevaplar… ve elbette ki daha fazlası.    DİPNOT: Nogger gibi bir bölüm oldu. Karamelli başlayıp, kakaolu bitiyor. Ona göre

In this episode we return to Foucault to explore the love between Ned and Robert as a form of queer intimacy, as well as the grief they share over Lyanna's death.   Mentioned in this episode: Sedgwick, E.K. 2015, Between men: English literature and male homosocial desire, Columbia university press. "Friendship as a Way of Life" (interview with Michael Foucault in Le Gai Pied magazine in 1981, translated by John Johnston). Ben-Hur 1951 (film). Directed by William Wyler. The Celluloid Closet (documentary film). Directed by Rob Epstein and Jeffrey Friedman. Faderman, L. 1981, Surpassing the love of men : romantic friendship and love between women from the Renaissance to the present,  William Morrow & Company. Not a Cast Podcast (Episode 5: A GAME OF THRONES, EDDARD I: “This is Her Place”): https://notacastasoiaf.podbean.com/e/episode-5-a-game-of-thrones-eddard-i-this-is-her-place/  Till, K.E. 2005, The New Berlin Memory, Politics, Place, University of Minnesota Press.   You can support us on Patreon at https://www.patreon.com/tropewatchers. If you enjoyed A Clash of Critics, check out our flagship podcast, Trope Watchers, the podcast about pop culture and why it matters: tropewatchers.com. CW: A Clash of Critics frequently discusses issues such as violence, abuse, sexual assault, bigotry, and other sensitive topics.

81 Minutes PG-13 Bird is one-third of the hosts of the Friends Against Government podcast. Bird joins Pete to discuss various concepts but especially that of the theory of Biopower developed by Michael Foucault. They discuss Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari's 2 volume set subtitled "Capitalism and Schizophrenia" as well as looking at the Non-Aggression Principle. A thematic look into Bret Easton Ellis' American Psycho is also done. Episode 463: The Commons, the Panopticon and Your 'Society of Control' w/ Bird from Friends Against Government Link to Bird's Episode on Rhizomatics Friends Against Government Podcast Link to Bird's Notes on This Episode Michel Foucault's Biopower Anti-Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia Renegade University 25% Off Discount Code Get Autonomy 19 Skills PDF Download Unloose The Goose The Monopoly On Violence Pete's Patreon Pete's Paypal Pete's Books on Amazon Pete's Books Available for Crypto Pete on Facebook Pete on Twitter

¿Qué es la Teoría Queer? Michael Foucault y Judith Butler.

Biopolítica é um termo muito caro no universo de Michael Foucault. O filósofo trata de disseminar o termo como sendo fundamental para analisar como governos europeus, em especial, no século XVIII, passaram a descobrir a população como elemento fundamental para fortalecer suas razões de Estados, trazendo mecanismos políticos de regulamentação dos processos da vida.Neste episódio, Sérgio Amadeu percorre como a biopolítica criou a gestão da saúde e como essa noção vem da observação de um cenário de racionalidade política que se dá com a emergência do liberalismo. Ele também observa como o termo pode ser analisado no atual contexto da pandemia de Covid-19 no Brasil.

Michael Foucault se enfoca en la modernidad desde el siglo XVI hasta el siglo XIX, analizando las diferentes esferas de la sociedad, estableciendo un cambio epistémico, dónde el biopoder tiene un gran impacto en las narraciones que nos rigen.

Salve, Salve, meu populacho abençoado. Aproveitamos que o ano está se encerrando e queremos incutir no espírito de nossos ouvintes a semente da maldade… a semente do anarquismo. Nesse programa especial, o nosso guerreirinho suburbano recebe o cientista político e anarquista (sem carteirinha) Acácio Augusto para discutir alguns pontos básicos do anarquismo e o que essa tática tem a nos dizer sobre o estado do mundo em que vivemos. Indicações de leitura:Os grandes escritos anarquistas (George Woodcock) A coragem da verdade (Michael Foucault)

In his essay "On the Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life," Nietzsche attacks the notion that humans are totally determined by the historical forces that shape their physical and mental environment. Where other philosophers like Plato saw virtue in remembering eternal truths that earthly existence had wiped from our memories, Nietzsche extolled the virtues of forgetting, of becoming "untimely" and creating a zone where something new could arise. For Nietzsche, history was useful only if it served Life. Because we live in an age which constantly reifies history (through movies, news, social media, etc.) while also tricking us into thinking we somehow exist outside of history, the essay remains as relevant today as it was when Nietzsche wrote it a century and a half ago. REFERENCES Nietzsche, "On the Uses and Disadvantages of History for Life" in [Untimely Meditations](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UntimelyMeditations)_ Epic Rap Battles of History: Eastern Philosophers vs Western Philosophers (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0N_RO-jL-90) Ernest Newman, Life of Wagner (https://www.amazon.com/Life-Wagner-Volumes-Ernest-Newman/dp/0521291496) Alexander Nehamas, [Nietzsche: Life as Literature](https://www.amazon.com/Nietzsche-Life-Literature-Alexander-Nehamas/dp/0674624262/ref=sr11?keywords=Nietzsche%3A+Life+as+Literature&qid=1560911442&s=books&sr=1-1) Alfred Korzybski, Manhood of Humanity (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/25457/25457-pdf.pdf) Michael Foucault, "What is Englightenment?" (https://leap.colostate.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/24/2017/01/Foucault-What-is-enlightenment.pdf) Antinatalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antinatalism) Friedrich Nietzsche, Thus Spoke Zarathustra (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/1998/1998-h/1998-h.htm) James Carse, [Finite and Infinite Games: A Vision of Life as Play and Possibility](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FiniteandInfiniteGames)_ P. J. O’Rourke (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P._J._O%27Rourke), American writer Richard Pryor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Pryor), American comedian

En este episodio hago un análisis de la película 'Rear Window' de Alfred Hitchcock para encontrar los elementos característicos del panoptismo que plantea Michael Foucault en su libro 'vigilar y castigar'. El objetivo no es otro que acercar al oyente a este concepto filosófico a través de la pieza artística del director británico.

Continuing on "What Is Enlightenment" by Immanuel Kant (1784), "On Enlightening the Mind" by Moses Mendelssohn (1784), and "What Is Enlightenment" by Michael Foucault (1984). We finish up Kant (the courage to know!) and lay out the Mendelssohn (cultivation vs. enlightenment) and Foucault (ironically heroize the present!). Will this conversation enlighten you? Who knows? Listen to part one first or get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen Edition. Please support PEL! End song: "Holy Fool" by Love and Rockets. Listen to singer Daniel Ash on Nakedly Examined Music #35.

On "What Is Enlightenment" by Immanuel Kant (1784), "On Enlightening the Mind" by Moses Mendelssohn (1784), and "What Is Enlightenment" by Michael Foucault (1984). At the end of the historical period known as The Enlightenment, a Berlin newspaper asked what exactly that is, and Kant and Mendelssohn responded. Both were concerned with whether too much enlightenment among the public can cause social unrest, and so whether there should be freedom of speech and opinion. Foucault thinks that we're not yet Enlightened, that it's an ongoing process of critique.  Continue on part 2, or get the unbroken, ad-free Citizen Edition now. Please support PEL!

IOE Public Lectures: Prof Simon Marginson draws on and integrates a range of social science disciplines in his work, primarily political economy and political philosophy, historical sociology and social theory. His work focuses on globalisation and higher education, international and comparative higher education, and higher education and social inequality. He is currently researching the implications of the worldwide trend to high participation systems of higher education. Respondent: Professor Stephen Ball's main areas of academic interest are in sociologically informed education policy analysis, especially concerning, social inequalities, the role of the state and the market in education. Most recently his work has addressed changing modes of governance in education, as well as offering a comprehensive application of the work of Michael Foucault to education [in Foucault as Education, 2017]. #IOELectures

Aujourd'hui j'aimerais vous parler de tennis. Mon ami, Michael Foucault, avec qui j'ai l'honneur de ...

Welcome to Mere Rhetoric, the podcast for beginners and insiders about the ideas, people and movements who have shaped rhetorical history. I’m Mary Hedengren, we have Samantha and Morgan in the booth and we’re all three of us different people—why?   Who determines who you are? Why do you pursuit the things that are important to you, whther they be published articles, a thin and athletic physique or a reputation of being a decent human being? Michael Foucault addresses the idea of forming “docile bodies” in Discipline and Punish. This book starts with a graphic, contemporary description of someone being drawn and quartered and ends with the declaration that “The judges of normality are present everywhere [...] and each individual, where ever he may find himself, subjects to it his body, his gestures, his behavior, his aptitudes, his achievements” (304). It’s a chilling progression. But if you think about it, there are things that we do because of “judges of normality” that we couldn’t be forced into by a tortuter. Can you imagine a prison where it would be moral to force you to wake up at 4:30 and run 10 miles and then lift weights, and then to relax with a glass of mysterious green smoothie? But if you think you need to look a certain way then you might do these unpleasant things to satisfy the “judges of normality.” The link between old-style torture and contemporary judgemental attitudes trace through this text. Here are the highlights along the way: torture as public spectacle (7). body as intermediary between people and sovereign (11). But a change occurs: punishment stops being about whether or not the accused commiteed the crime and more about whther the accused is guilty. That sounds like teh same thing, but really it’s a little different because justie began to consider “to what extent the subject’s will was involved in the crime’ (17). Accordingly, punishment became to be about straightening out taht will “the expiation that once rained down up on the body must be replace by a punishment that acts in depth on the heart, the thoughts, the will, the inclinations” (16) and “a general process has led judges to judge something other than crims; they ahve been led in their sentencing to do soemthing other than jsut and the power of judging has been transferred, in part, to other autorities than the jduges of the offence” as sociologists, preachers and other just eh will and the inclination of the accused (22). Soverign maintains “right to punish” like the “right ot make war” (48) but “the role of the people was an ambigous one” as they also “caimed the right to conserve the execution” and “had the right to take part” of the specacle (58). This made executions a battle between the power of the soverign and the power of the people: “In these executions, whih out to show only the terrorizing power of the prince, there was a whole aspect of the carnival, in which rules were inverted, authority mocked and criminals transformed inot heroes” (61). So, “this hand-to-hand fight ebtwen the vengence of the princ aand the contained anger of the people, through the mediation of the victim and the executioner, must be concluded” (73). So reformers had to “define new tactis in order to reach a target that is now more subtle but also more widely spread in the social body” (89) not just committing a certain crime. ‘A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly by the chain of (102) their own ideas; it is at the stable point of reason that he secures the end of the chain” (103). So bodies in prisons are made docile, “subjected, used, transformed and improved” (136) as “working [the body] retail indivdually, of exercising upon it a subtle coercion, of obtaining holds up on it at the level of the mechanism itself—movements, gestures attitudes, rapidity: an infinitesimal power over the active body” (137). And this is by no means restricted to the prison: the classroom, the military camp and the hospital all begin to prescribe this level of control over the bodies to be made docile. “Like surveillance and with it, normalization becomes one of the great instruments of power at the end of the classical age” (184) “In a system of discipline, the child is more individualized that the adult, the patient more than the healthy man, the madman and the delinquent more than the normal and non-delinquent” (193). The panopticon, of course, features heavily. DESCRIBE “In short, it reverse the principle of the duneon; or rather of its three functions—to enclose, to deprive of light and to hide—the preserves only the first and eliminates to other two” (200). “There are two images, then, of discipline. At one extreme, the discipline-blockage, the enclosed institutions, established on the edges of society, turned inwards towards negative functions: arresting evil, breaking communications, suspending time. At the toher extreme, with panopticism, is the discipline-mechanism: a functional mechanism that must improve tehe xercise of power b making it lighter, more rapid, more effective, a design of subtle coercion for a society to come” (209). “At first they were expected to neutralize dangers, to fix useless or disturbed poulations, to avoid the inconveniences of over-large assemblesi; now they were being asked to play a positive role, for they were bceoming able to do so, to increase the possible utility of individuals” (210). “‘Discipline’ may be identified neither with an institution nor with an apparatus; it is a type of power, a modality for its exercise, comprising a whole set of instruments, techniques, prcedures, levels of application, targes; it is a ‘physics’ [...] of power” (215). Difference between illegality and delinquencies—a delinquent is subset of illegal: defines and specifies the delinquent, which can be used by prison and authority forever afterwards. It creates a three-fold system—prison, police, delinquent (282) Eventually, the prison mentality escpaed the prison. “As a result, a cetain signifcant generality moved between the least irregularty and the greatest crime; it was no longer th offense, the attack on the common interest, it was the school, the court, the asulum or the prison. It geeralise in teh sphere of meaning the function of carceral generalized in the sphere of tactics’ (299) “The carceral network does not cast the unassimilable into a confused hell; there is no outisde. it takes back with one hand what it seems to exclude witht he other” (301) prison continues, on those who are enslaved to it, a work begun elsewhere, which the whole of society pursues on (302)each individual through innumerable mechanisms of discipline (303). “We are in the society of the teacher-judge, the doctor-judge, the educator-judge, the ‘social-worker’-judge; it it on them that the universal reign of the normalitve is based, and each individual, whereever he may find himself, subjects to it his body, his gestures, his beavior, his aptttudes, his acheivements” (304).     So what does all of this mean for rhetoric? Some theorists, like Edward Said and Richard Miller despair at ever standing outside of the panopticon, that the power relations are too deeply entwined and too dispersed to be opposed. Instead of just stickin’ it to the man, or rescuing Robin Hood from the corrupt Sherriff of Nottingham, would-be revolutionaries have to change the entire system. And what makes the revolutionaries think that they have a better perspective when they, too, are implicated in the self-policing power structure?   In 1992, Barbara Beisecker examined Foucault’s influence for rhetoricians. Initially she was skeptically inclined (especially in the early 90s!) to say that Foucault was just being invoked in order to embrace the fashion for post-modernism without losing our traditional perspectives on power dynamics. However, foucault’s focus on theways that communities construct individual positions opens up new views of rhetoric. Biesecker concludes that because of Foucault, “We might say, then, that a critical rhetoric is a timely discourse whose task is not, as we have heretofor thought, one of changing what’s in people’s heads.” Instead it is about turning the grid of intelligibility that organizes the present in such a way that it becomes possible to transform the crituqe conducted in the form of necessary limitation into a practical crituqe that takes the form of a possible transgression out of which new forms of community, co-existence, pleasure” will emerge” (362). Rhetoric becomes less about individuals than the whole community, all focused on creating docile bodies, prioritizes. It may be daunting to think about changing an entire community with rhetoric instead of one person., but as young John Muckelbauer in 2000 argued, there are still ways to effect change even in Foucault’s self-policing view of culture, as long as we “debundle what we mean by resistence his articulation of resistanceis clearly something quite differentfrom a traditional understandingof resistancewith its connection to “agency”. […] the concept of power functions differently(as primarily productive),and the relationshipbetween power and resistanceis not one of binary opposition. On a more practical level,anothermajordistinction isthat this versionprovidesno central concept, no preexisting category—such as identity—around which to mobilize collective action. Instead, political action is itself transfigured, emphasizing strategic local ac- tivity and transitory alliances as opposed to traditionalconceptions of mass collective movements.” So we’re not entirely subsumed by predetermined roles because of the judges of normalicy all around us, but neither are we free when we are unfettered.