MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4205306926 · doi:10.46692/9781447354970.008

Locating civil Society in Foucault

2020· other· en· W4205306926 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFoucault, Power, and Ethics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil societyPolitical scienceSociologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As highlighted in Chapters 1–4 and elsewhere, there is no broad agreement on the concept of civil society. Its scope ranges from Enlightenment thinking to the critical perspectives put forward by Marx, Gramsci, Foucault and critical theorists. This chapter focuses on Foucault's view of civil society not as a historical given but as a mode of governance associated with changes in governmentality. In this regard, I distinguish Foucault's approach from the work of Anglo-Foucauldians, who refused to consider the state as the centre of control by political agents or classes in the exercise of power, legitimate or otherwise. Instead, they focused on the programmes and rationalities of government that work across multiple alliances between different actors – including those of the public sector, communities and community organizations, businesses and firms, and citizens themselves – and that enjoin these agents to take on certain forms of self-government and responsibility (Dean and Villadsen, 2016: 2). It is ironic, perhaps, that Foucault's Anglo-Foucauldian inheritors should end up favouring civil society politics over a state-based one, not least because Foucault himself was not only state-phobic but also suspicious of political action based on civil society (Dean and Villadsen, 2016: 3). Foucault beyond Anglo-Foucauldianism Building on Foucault's work, neo-Foucauldian scholars in the UK, Australia, Canada and the US contributed to what they called the ‘Foucault effect’. Identified by Graham Burchell, Colin Gordon and Peter Miller (1991), the ‘Anglo-Foucauldian’ school is associated with scholars from these four countries. Peter Miller and Nikolas Rose, two of its key figures, write that it comprises ‘an informal thought community that seeks to craft some tools through which to understand how our present had been assembled’ (Miller and Rose, 2008: 8). Anglo-Foucauldians do not aim to be Foucault scholars but selectively1 apply his initial insights on governmentality to new areas. They draw on Discipline and Punish (1977 [1975]) and the lecture on government from his 1977–78 course at the Collège de France, which appeared in English in 1979 (Foucault, 1979a; see also Foucault, 1991).

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFoucault, Power, and EthicsFrench-language works237,207