How does Foucault's concept of power differ from traditional views?

Foucault's concept of power differs from traditional views as he sees power as omnipresent, not just held by a few.

In traditional political theory, power is often viewed as a commodity that is held by a select few, such as the ruling class or the state. It is seen as something that can be transferred or seized, and is often associated with coercion or force. This perspective is often referred to as the 'sovereign' or 'juridical' model of power.

Michel Foucault, a French philosopher and social theorist, challenged this traditional view with his own concept of power. He argued that power is not just held by a few, but is omnipresent in all social relationships and interactions. It is not something that can be owned or transferred, but is instead a network of relations that permeates society.

Foucault's concept of power is often referred to as 'disciplinary' power. He argued that power is not just exerted through force or coercion, but also through the control of knowledge and information. This is achieved through various social institutions, such as schools, hospitals, and prisons, which shape and control individuals' behaviour through norms and expectations.

Foucault also introduced the concept of 'bio-power', which refers to the ways in which power is exerted over bodies, both individually and collectively. This includes everything from medical practices and health policies, to population control measures and biotechnologies.

In contrast to the traditional view, Foucault's concept of power is not necessarily negative or oppressive. He argued that power is also productive and can lead to resistance and change. This is because power is not just top-down, but also bottom-up, and individuals can challenge and subvert power relations.

In summary, Foucault's concept of power is a radical departure from traditional views. It offers a more complex and nuanced understanding of power, which recognises its pervasive and multifaceted nature. It also highlights the role of knowledge and institutions in shaping power relations, and the potential for resistance and change.