Willem de Vlaming, January 2026
— ⓦ —
The core of Michel Foucault’s historical philosophy, as most clearly illustrated in ‘Discipline and Punish’, is that history is not driven by ideas, progress, or human emancipation, but by shifting techniques of power that produce particular kinds of subjects, bodies, and truths.
For Foucault, language and narrative (discours) are not just ways of describing reality — they are the primary mechanisms through which reality, power, and subjects are produced. Language and narrative organize what can be thought, said, and done at a given historical moment. They produce truth, normalize behavior, shape identity, and make historical forms of domination appear natural, rational, and humane.
The individual is not the origin of language and discourse, but its effect
Language creates regimes of truth
Foucault rejects the idea that language simply represents facts. Societies operate within “regimes of truth”: structured fields of statements that determine what counts as true or false. These regimes are sustained by institutions (science, law, medicine, education, media).
Importance: Language establishes the boundaries of legitimacy. If something cannot be said in an accepted way, it cannot function as truth.
Discourse, not ideology, is central
Foucault uses “discourse” instead of ideology because: discourse is not merely false consciousness; and it actively produces objects (e.g., “the criminal,” “the homosexual,” “the insane”). Language does not just label preexisting categories — it brings them into existence as social realities.
Narrative organizes power historically:
Historical narratives (e.g., “humanization of punishment,” “medical progress”) are not neutral stories. In Discipline and Punish, the narrative of reform masks a shift to more efficient control. Language reframes coercion as care, treatment, or rehabilitation.
Narrative makes domination appear benevolent and inevitable.
Naming is an act of power
To name is to govern: Diagnosis, Classification, Statistical categories, Risk profiles. Once named, individuals become objects of intervention. Example: A “criminal” becomes a case, a profile, a trajectory—not a moral agent.
The subject is formed through language
Foucault’s famous claim: “The individual is not the origin of discourse, but its effect.” Through confession, examination, and self-description: people learn to speak themselves into existence, and; Identity becomes something one must narrate and justify. Language turns external power into self-surveillance.
Silence is as important as speech
What cannot be said matters as much as what can: Taboo topics, unspeakable experiences, excluded knowledges. Power works by structuring absence, not just expression.
Language enables normalization
Discourse defines: Normal / abnormal; Healthy / pathological; Productive / unproductive. Once normalized, these categories operate without force—people align themselves voluntarily.
Counter-narratives enable resistance
Because power operates through discourse, resistance must also be discursive. Foucault supports local, partial, experimental counter-narratives, not grand ideologies. To change language is to change what can exist socially.
Why this matters philosophically. Language is not expressive — it is constitutive.
Foucault replaces:
> Truth → truth-effects
> History → genealogy
> Meaning → conditions of possibility
⸻ ⓦ ⸻
Power creates realities: behaviors, identities, norms, and knowledge.
Power produces knowledge; knowledge reinforces power.
Foucault overturns the classical view of power as something that only says *no*, power is productive, not just repressive. In Discipline and Punish: punishment does not simply suppress crime, It produces disciplined bodies — efficient, obedient, calculable individuals.
History operates on bodies before minds: How bodies move; How they sit, work, march, learn; How they internalize time, rhythm, and surveillance. Public torture becomes prison discipline,which is not not humanization, but optimization of control. From sovereign power to disciplinary power Foucault traces a historical shift:
Sovereign Power | Disciplinary Power
Spectacle of violence | Invisible surveillance
Punishes the body | Trains the body
Central authority | Distributed institutions
Law and decree | Norms and routines
Key insight: Modernity replaces dramatic cruelty with continuous control.
The Panopticon as historical diagram
The Panopticon is not just a prison — it is a model of power:
> Constant visibility
> Uncertainty of observation
> Internalized discipline
Core historical move: People begin to police themselves.
Power and knowledge are inseparable
Modern punishment relies on: Criminology, Psychiatry, Statistics, Pedagogy. These are not neutral sciences—they are tools of classification and normalization. Power produces knowledge; knowledge reinforces power.
Normalization replaces justice
The goal of punishment shifts from justice to normality: Who deviates? Who needs correction? Who is dangerous? Crime becomes a symptom, not a moral act. The prison is not a failure — it is a successful technology of power that spreads across society. The subject (individual) is historically produced. The modern self emerges through surveillance, examination, and discipline. Freedom and identity are shaped inside power relations. We are not outside history — we are its effects.
Foucault’s historical philosophy shows that modern institutions do not liberate individuals but fabricate disciplined subjects through diffuse, technical, and normalized forms of power disguised as progress and care. Foucaults method: Traces contingent practices, not grand ideas; Shows how “obvious” institutions had no necessity; Exposes forgotten alternatives and power struggles. Discipline and Punish reveals: How modern power works best when it is invisible; Why reform can deepen control; How humanity can increase while freedom shrinks