Compare And Contrast Mills And Foucault On Liberty
Different Perspectives on Normalization
Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish and J.S. Mill’s On Liberty both attend to the idea of the individual, similarly, yet quite differently. Mill believes that society thoroughly conditions minds so that every decision or action made by a person is heavily influenced by society. To Mill, genuine choices make individuality, as well as being spontaneous. According to Mill, as humankind has gone further and further into civil society, the less likely it is to produce true individuals because the further conditioned people become. Michel Foucault, on the other hand, believes that this heavy conditioning of society has created the individual. As society has transitioned from punishing its people, to training …show more content…
and disciplining its people, it has created individuals. The two arguments meet at the fact that both philosophers believe that society has created a norm that conditions the people, however Mill believes that this norm has taken away from individuality, while Foucault believes that this norm has unnaturally created the individual.
As society progresses further, the harder it is for a person to obtain genuine individuality, because society engulfs itself deeper and deeper into public opinion. As society becomes conditioned and controlled by popular opinion, it makes harder for individuals to not conform to it. If someone has an opinion, it is hard to tell whether or not this opinion was developed from outward pressures and conditioning of society. This makes it difficult for one to be spontaneous and original with opinions and ideas of their own. There is an illusion of a person having their own, genuine opinion because it is difficult to tell whether or not they are conforming. Many choices are made because of the social tyranny that exists, which causes people to conform to the majority. Milly believes that mass society is a threat to individuality because of immense pressure it exerts on the individual. Individuals are influenced by the public opinion of mass society which causes one to conform and lose their individuality. Mill argues that this is a negative thing because people were not destined to conform. Not only are people strongly influenced by the likings and dislikings of society, but these likings and dislikings “enslave...the soul itself” (54).
When one conforms and “does anything because it is the custom, [he] makes no choice” (62). Within mass society, an individual loses their individuality when they conform with the majority. If one conforms by “choice”, they really are not choosing, this person just has the illusion they are making a choice. What is actually happening is subtle tyranny that is manifesting itself in social control. There must be some sort of originality within the individual in order to resist this tyranny that exists in society. Mill says that in order to maintain individuality, people should form their own original opinions, however they should not force these opinions on others. Forcing opinions on others is lack of respect for others’ personal autonomy.
Mill emphasizes the importance of being spontaneous and one’s own person. Mill believes that modern democracy has created a norm because modern democracy only enforces the public opinion, while suppressing the minority opinion. This is problematic because the minority opinion could be correct and knowledgeable, however it is discouraged and stigmatized. Over time, as democracy has been engrained in society, it has taken away from individuality. As society progresses further and further, according to Mill, it is less possible to be a true individual because norms are so ingrained in the community. Any time someone makes a decision that conforms, they are not being an individual. However, if someone creates a new idea or invention or is spontaneous, this is the only way to be a unique individual. Foucault addresses specifically how discipline and punishment have created the individual over time.
He begins with the historical evolution of legal punishment, and how in the 18th century, society only punished the body. The body was the only thing society knew how to punish, and they believed that it showed the truth of the crime. However, recent regimes of punishment have introduced punishing the soul, rather than the body. Rather than physically punishing someone, society puts them in prison or jail, and believes their “soul’ can be rehabilitated. Society created the soul, which “inhibits him [or her] and brings [the individual] into existence” (Foucault 13). By punishing the soul, judgement of the soul has been created, therefore creating judgement of the individual. At the end of the eighteenth century, rather than taking revenge on the individual and making them pay their debt to society, the individual is punished, critiqued, and examined.Foucault goes on to say that prisons represent other institutions that judge such as schools and hospitals. They are fixed spaces in which time is spent where people are given examinations and are judged. A norm is established, and society is given the “right” path to follow. Through judgement in hospitals, schools and prisons, we are creating a norm, and creating the right path to follow for
individuals. Rather than punishing the body, the law finds a punishment that fits the crime. A link between the crime and the punishment is necessary, and the punishment must be a deterrent and make people fear committing the crime. Transitioning from physically punishing the body, to correcting the soul redesigned the individual. This corrective mentality is meant to reset the soul back to obedience, with new habits that society deems as good. Rather than punishing the individual and restoring him back to his place in society, we create someone who is obedient. After the eighteenth century when punishment started transforming, it became important to improve the body rather than punish the body. The body started to become manipulated and classified, according to an established norm.
Instead of controlling the body with punishment, the body is now controlled with discipline. Foucault writes that, “discipline 'makes' individuals; it is the specific technique of a power that regards individuals both as objects and as instruments of its exercise” (54). He argues that institutions like prisons, schools and hospitals are tools for controlling and transforming groups. These institutions have created groups, and he believes that the idea of a group has created the individual, because individuals can vary and rank within the group.There is a standard created, and someone can rank as above normal, abnormal, or average. Medical exams and also school exams create and rank individuals. Bodies now undergo observation, but a different type of observation. Rather than observing an execution, society is observed constantly in schools and hospitals. This effect of observation occurs without physical violence.
Society has now become an organism that corrects deviations from the norm, and organizes and ranks individuals according to their normality. For Foucault, the norm that creates the individual is harmful and oppresses deviants and the "abnormal." This is an unnatural way to create the individual. The more someone deviates from the norm, the more they become an individual. Individuality has nothing to do with taking control over ones life, much like Mill believes. Individuality has to do with variations from the norm. Everyone being constantly observed and analyzed creates an individual, however this is an abnormal process.. Subnormal is bad and negative, and society desires to restore them back to normal. This examination spreads throughout society. Schools, factories, hospitals and prisons resemble each other, not just because they look similar, but because they examine pupils, workers, patients and prisoners.
As one can see, both Foucault and Mill believe society has established a norm. However, according to Mill, this norm has suppressed individuality, while Foucault believes it has created the individual. Mill believes that individuality is about making choices, and in a modern democracy, choices are limited, and most often, are made to conform. Foucault believes that the norm has created an individual, because normalization has created the ranking and observation of individuals. Individuals make up groups, are were created from moving to punishing people to disciplining people.
Michel Foucault’s Discipline and Punish and J.S. Mill’s On Liberty both attend to the idea of the individual, similarly, yet quite differently. Mill believes that society thoroughly conditions minds so that every decision or action made by a person is heavily influenced by society. To Mill, genuine choices make individuality, as well as being spontaneous. According to Mill, as humankind has gone further and further into civil society, the less likely it is to produce true individuals because the further conditioned people become. Michel Foucault, on the other hand, believes that this heavy conditioning of society has created the individual. As society has transitioned from punishing its people, to training …show more content…
and disciplining its people, it has created individuals. The two arguments meet at the fact that both philosophers believe that society has created a norm that conditions the people, however Mill believes that this norm has taken away from individuality, while Foucault believes that this norm has unnaturally created the individual.
As society progresses further, the harder it is for a person to obtain genuine individuality, because society engulfs itself deeper and deeper into public opinion. As society becomes conditioned and controlled by popular opinion, it makes harder for individuals to not conform to it. If someone has an opinion, it is hard to tell whether or not this opinion was developed from outward pressures and conditioning of society. This makes it difficult for one to be spontaneous and original with opinions and ideas of their own. There is an illusion of a person having their own, genuine opinion because it is difficult to tell whether or not they are conforming. Many choices are made because of the social tyranny that exists, which causes people to conform to the majority. Milly believes that mass society is a threat to individuality because of immense pressure it exerts on the individual. Individuals are influenced by the public opinion of mass society which causes one to conform and lose their individuality. Mill argues that this is a negative thing because people were not destined to conform. Not only are people strongly influenced by the likings and dislikings of society, but these likings and dislikings “enslave...the soul itself” (54).
When one conforms and “does anything because it is the custom, [he] makes no choice” (62). Within mass society, an individual loses their individuality when they conform with the majority. If one conforms by “choice”, they really are not choosing, this person just has the illusion they are making a choice. What is actually happening is subtle tyranny that is manifesting itself in social control. There must be some sort of originality within the individual in order to resist this tyranny that exists in society. Mill says that in order to maintain individuality, people should form their own original opinions, however they should not force these opinions on others. Forcing opinions on others is lack of respect for others’ personal autonomy.
Mill emphasizes the importance of being spontaneous and one’s own person. Mill believes that modern democracy has created a norm because modern democracy only enforces the public opinion, while suppressing the minority opinion. This is problematic because the minority opinion could be correct and knowledgeable, however it is discouraged and stigmatized. Over time, as democracy has been engrained in society, it has taken away from individuality. As society progresses further and further, according to Mill, it is less possible to be a true individual because norms are so ingrained in the community. Any time someone makes a decision that conforms, they are not being an individual. However, if someone creates a new idea or invention or is spontaneous, this is the only way to be a unique individual. Foucault addresses specifically how discipline and punishment have created the individual over time.
He begins with the historical evolution of legal punishment, and how in the 18th century, society only punished the body. The body was the only thing society knew how to punish, and they believed that it showed the truth of the crime. However, recent regimes of punishment have introduced punishing the soul, rather than the body. Rather than physically punishing someone, society puts them in prison or jail, and believes their “soul’ can be rehabilitated. Society created the soul, which “inhibits him [or her] and brings [the individual] into existence” (Foucault 13). By punishing the soul, judgement of the soul has been created, therefore creating judgement of the individual. At the end of the eighteenth century, rather than taking revenge on the individual and making them pay their debt to society, the individual is punished, critiqued, and examined.Foucault goes on to say that prisons represent other institutions that judge such as schools and hospitals. They are fixed spaces in which time is spent where people are given examinations and are judged. A norm is established, and society is given the “right” path to follow. Through judgement in hospitals, schools and prisons, we are creating a norm, and creating the right path to follow for
individuals. Rather than punishing the body, the law finds a punishment that fits the crime. A link between the crime and the punishment is necessary, and the punishment must be a deterrent and make people fear committing the crime. Transitioning from physically punishing the body, to correcting the soul redesigned the individual. This corrective mentality is meant to reset the soul back to obedience, with new habits that society deems as good. Rather than punishing the individual and restoring him back to his place in society, we create someone who is obedient. After the eighteenth century when punishment started transforming, it became important to improve the body rather than punish the body. The body started to become manipulated and classified, according to an established norm.
Instead of controlling the body with punishment, the body is now controlled with discipline. Foucault writes that, “discipline 'makes' individuals; it is the specific technique of a power that regards individuals both as objects and as instruments of its exercise” (54). He argues that institutions like prisons, schools and hospitals are tools for controlling and transforming groups. These institutions have created groups, and he believes that the idea of a group has created the individual, because individuals can vary and rank within the group.There is a standard created, and someone can rank as above normal, abnormal, or average. Medical exams and also school exams create and rank individuals. Bodies now undergo observation, but a different type of observation. Rather than observing an execution, society is observed constantly in schools and hospitals. This effect of observation occurs without physical violence.
Society has now become an organism that corrects deviations from the norm, and organizes and ranks individuals according to their normality. For Foucault, the norm that creates the individual is harmful and oppresses deviants and the "abnormal." This is an unnatural way to create the individual. The more someone deviates from the norm, the more they become an individual. Individuality has nothing to do with taking control over ones life, much like Mill believes. Individuality has to do with variations from the norm. Everyone being constantly observed and analyzed creates an individual, however this is an abnormal process.. Subnormal is bad and negative, and society desires to restore them back to normal. This examination spreads throughout society. Schools, factories, hospitals and prisons resemble each other, not just because they look similar, but because they examine pupils, workers, patients and prisoners.
As one can see, both Foucault and Mill believe society has established a norm. However, according to Mill, this norm has suppressed individuality, while Foucault believes it has created the individual. Mill believes that individuality is about making choices, and in a modern democracy, choices are limited, and most often, are made to conform. Foucault believes that the norm has created an individual, because normalization has created the ranking and observation of individuals. Individuals make up groups, are were created from moving to punishing people to disciplining people.