Kaspar Villadsen – författare

Michel Foucault is rarely viewed as a philosopher of technology, yet academics and students routinely refer to his terms 'technologies of power', 'governmental technologies', and 'technologies of the self'. This book is a response to the contradiction between the paucity of research into Foucault's technological thought and the abundancy of technological vocabulary and metaphors in his own writings as well as in the commentary literature; it provides the most extensive examination of the role of technology in Foucault's work so far. Villadsen argues that technology serves neither as an object of Foucault's analysis nor as a convenient metaphor for making arguments, but as rather integral to his thinking and writing. As the book's title, Foucault's Technologies indicates, it explores not Foucault and modern technology understood as technical devices like television, smartphones, or industrial machines, but rather Foucault's approach to the theme of technology and his use of technological terms. The book provides an extensive exploration of Foucault's technological thought, arguing that he offers a distinct framework that confronts commonsensical understanding and other scientific approaches to technology. The reader will travel a route paved with discussions of how Foucault's work intersects with that of other key thinkers, particularly Heidegger, Althusser, Nietzsche, and Deleuze. While presenting efforts in intellectual history, the book ultimately focusses on the analytical implications for 'users', showing how researchers can benefit from Foucault's technological approach. As such, the book offers an analytical framework effective for the study of problems in present-day welfare states and the emergent world of data-capitalism.

State Phobia and Civil Society draws extensively upon the work of Michel Foucault to argue for the necessity of the concept of the state in political and social analysis. In so doing, it takes on not only the dominant view in the human sciences that the concept of the state is outmoded, but also the large interpretative literature on Foucault, which claims that he displaces the state for a de-centered analytics of power. Understanding Foucault means understanding all his interlocutors—whether Marxists, Maoists, neoliberals, or social democrats. It requires turning to Foucault's colleagues, including Deleuze and Guattari, François Ewald, and Blandine Kreigel, in relation to whom he carved out a position. And it entails an examination of his legacy in Hardt and Negri, the theorists of Empire, or in Nikolas Rose, the influential English sociologist. Foucault's own view is highly ambiguous: he claims to be concerned with the exercise of political sovereignty, yet his work cannot make visible the concept of the state. Moving beyond Foucault, the authors outline new ways of conceiving the state's role in establishing social order and in mediating between an inequality-producing capitalist economy and the juridical equality and political rights of individuals. Arguing that states and their cooperation remain of vital importance to resolving contemporary crises, they demonstrate the interdependence of state and civil society and the necessity of social forms of governance.

State Phobia and Civil Society draws extensively upon the work of Michel Foucault to argue for the necessity of the concept of the state in political and social analysis. In so doing, it takes on not only the dominant view in the human sciences that the concept of the state is outmoded, but also the large interpretative literature on Foucault, which claims that he displaces the state for a de-centered analytics of power. Understanding Foucault means understanding all his interlocutors—whether Marxists, Maoists, neoliberals, or social democrats. It requires turning to Foucault's colleagues, including Deleuze and Guattari, François Ewald, and Blandine Kreigel, in relation to whom he carved out a position. And it entails an examination of his legacy in Hardt and Negri, the theorists of Empire, or in Nikolas Rose, the influential English sociologist. Foucault's own view is highly ambiguous: he claims to be concerned with the exercise of political sovereignty, yet his work cannot make visible the concept of the state. Moving beyond Foucault, the authors outline new ways of conceiving the state's role in establishing social order and in mediating between an inequality-producing capitalist economy and the juridical equality and political rights of individuals. Arguing that states and their cooperation remain of vital importance to resolving contemporary crises, they demonstrate the interdependence of state and civil society and the necessity of social forms of governance.