規訓與懲罰

维基百科，自由的百科全书

本條目正在從en:Discipline and Punish 翻譯成中文。
歡迎您積極參與翻譯與修訂，目前已翻譯10%。

`規訓與懲罰`
Image:規訓與懲罰
作者	米歇爾·福柯
原著書名	Surveiller et punir
譯者	劉北成
國家	法國
語言	法語
題材	監獄監獄規訓懲罰
出版社	桂冠出版社
出版日期	1975
媒體類型	平裝
頁數	350
ISBN	ISBN 9575515781

規訓與懲罰－監獄的誕生是一部由哲學家米歇爾·福柯所著的書，原以「Surveiller et punir: Naissance de la prison」為標題於1975年出版於法國，後於1977年翻譯成英語，又於1992年翻譯成中文。這是一部對現今的西方刑罰體系中所發生的巨變，其背後所有的社會及理論架構之檢驗。它主要專注在法國的歷史文獻上，但這些審試的資料和現今的每個西方社會則都有相關連。它被認為是極有發展性的一項工作，並且已經影響了許多位的理論學家和藝術家們。

福柯試著挑戰「監獄變成了懲罰的代名詞是因為改良主義者的人道考量」這一普遍被接受的概念，雖然他也沒有否定它。他以極仔細的方式來回溯導致監獄成為刑罰主要手段的文化變遷主因，主要專注在對權力的主體和質問上。監獄是一種新的技術權力－「規訓」所使用的方法之一，此一權力依據福柯的說法，也可以在學校、醫院和軍事要塞中發現。《規訓與懲罰》這本書內所包含的主要的概念可以根據其四個部份區別成torture, punishment, discipline and prison。

[编辑] Torture

Foucault begins the book by contrasting two forms of penalty: the violent and chaotic public torture of Robert-François Damiens who was convicted of regicide in late 18th century, and the highly regimented daily schedule for inmates from an early 19th century prison. These examples provide a picture of just how profound the change in western penal systems were after less than a century. Foucault wants the reader to consider what led to these changes. How did western culture shift so radically?

To answer this question he begins by examining public torture itself. He argues that the public spectacle of torture was a theatrical forum which served several intended and unintended purposes for society. The intended purposes were:

Reflecting the violence of the original crime onto the convict's body for all to see.
Enacting the revenge upon the convict's body which the sovereign seeks for having been injured by the crime. Foucault argues that the law was considered an extension of the sovereign's body, and so the revenge must take the form of harming the convict's body.

Some unintended consequences were:

Providing a forum for the convict's body to become a locus of sympathy and admiration.
Creating a site of conflict between the masses and the sovereign at the convict's body. Foucault notes that public executions often led to riots in support of the prisoner.

Thus, he argues, the public execution was ultimately an ineffective use of the body, qualified as non-economical. As well, it was applied non-uniformly and haphazardly. Hence, its political cost was too high. It was the antithesis of the more modern concerns of the state: order and generalization.

[编辑] Punishment

The switch to prison was not immediate. There was a more graded change, though it ran its course rapidly. Prison was preceded by a different form of public spectacle. The theatre of public torture gave way to public chain gangs. Punishment became "gentle", though not for humanitarian reasons, Foucault suggests. He argues that reformists were unhappy with the unpredictable, unevenly distributed nature of the violence which the sovereign would focus on the body of the convict. The sovereign's right to punish was so disproportionate that it was ineffective and uncontrolled. Reformists felt that the power to punish and judge should become more evenly distributed, the state's power must be a form of public power. This, according to Foucault, was of more concern to reformists than humanitarian arguments.

Out of this movement towards generalized punishment, a thousand "mini-theatres" of punishment would have been created wherein the convicts' bodies would have put on display in a more ubiquitous, controlled, and effective spectacle. Prisoners would have been forced to do work which reflected their crime, thus repaying society for their infractions. This would have allowed the public to see the convicts' bodies enacting their punishment, and thus to reflect on the crime. But these experiments lasted less than twenty years.

Foucault argues that this theory of "gentle" punishment represented the first step away from the excessive force of the sovereign, and towards more generalized and controlled means of punishment. But, he suggests that the shift towards prison which followed was the result of a new "technology" and ontology for the body being developed in the 18th century, the "technology" of discipline, and the ontology of "man as machine".

[编辑] Discipline

The emergence of prison as the form of punishment for every crime grew out of the development of discipline in the 18th and 19th centuries, according to Foucault. He looks at the development of highly refined forms of discipline, of discipline concerned with the smallest and most precise aspects of a person's body. Discipline, he suggests, developed a new economy and politics for bodies. Modern institutions required that bodies must be individuated according to their tasks, as well as for training, observation, and control. Therefore, he argues, discipline created a whole new form of individuality for bodies, which enabled them to perform their duty within the new forms of economic, political, and military organizations emerging in the modern age and continuing to today.

The individuality discipline constructs for the bodies it controls has four characteristics, namely it makes individuality which is:

cellular - determining the spatial distribution of the bodies
organic - ensuring that the activities required of the bodies are "natural" for them
genetic - controlling the evolution over time of the activities of the bodies
combinatory - allowing for the combination of the force of many bodies into a single massive force

Foucault suggests that this individuality can be implemented in systems that are officially egalitarian, but which utilize discipline to construct non-egalitarian power relations:

Historically, the process by which the bourgeoisie became in the course of the eighteenth century the politically dominant class was masked by the establishment of an explicit, coded and formally egalitarian juridical framework, made possible by the organization of a parliamentary, representative regime. But the development and generalization of disciplinary mechanisms constituted the other, dark side of these processes. The general juridical form that guaranteed a system of rights that were egalitarian in principle was supported by these tiny, everyday, physical mechanisms, by all those systems of micro-power that are essentially non-egalitarian and asymmetrical that we call the disciplines. (p.222)

Foucault's argument is that discipline creates "docile bodies", ideal for the new economics, politics and warfare of the modern industrial age - bodies which function in factories, ordered military regiments, and school classrooms. But, to construct docile bodies the disciplinary institutions must be able to a) constantly observe and record the bodies they control, b) ensure the internalization of the disciplinary individuality within the bodies being controlled. That is, discipline must come about without excessive force through careful observation, and molding of the bodies into the correct form through this observation. This requires a particular form of institution, which Foucault argues, was exemplified by Jeremy Bentham's Panopticon.

The Panopticon was the ultimate realization of a modern disciplinary institution. It allowed for constant observation characterized by an "unequal gaze"; the constant possibility of observation. Perhaps the most important feature of the panopticon was that it was specifically designed so that the prisoner could never be sure whether s/he was being observed or not. The unequal gaze caused the internalization of disciplinary individuality, and the docile body required of its inmates. This means one is less likely to break rules or laws if they believe they are being watched, even if they are not. Thus, prison, and specifically those which follow the model of the Panopticon, provide the ideal form of modern punishment. Foucault argues that this is why the generalized, "gentle" punishment of public work gangs gave way to the prison. It was the ideal modernization of punishment, so its eventual dominance was natural.

Having laid out the emergence of the prison as the dominant form of punishment, Foucault devotes the rest of the book to examining its precise form and function in our society, to lay bare the reasons for its continued use, and question the assumed results of its use.

[编辑] Prison

In examining the construction of prison as the central means of criminal punishment, Foucault builds a case for the idea that prison became part of a larger “carceral system” which has become an all-encompassing sovereign institution in modern society. Prison is one part of a vast network, including schools, military institutions, hospitals, and factories, which build a panoptic society for its members. This system creates “…disciplinary careers…” (Discipline and Punish, p. 300) for those locked within its corridors. It is operated under the scientific authority of medicine, psychology, and criminology. As well, it operates according to principles which ensure that it “…cannot fail to produce delinquents.” (Discipline and Punish, p. 266) Delinquency, indeed, is produced when social petty crime (such as taking wood in the lord's lands) are no further tolerated, creating a class of specialized "delinquents" which acts as the police's proxy in surveillance of society.

[编辑] 另見

Automaton
Disciplinary institutions
Discourse, a Foucauldian concept developed in Discipline and Punish, among other works.
Drill commands
Governmentality
Panopticon

[编辑] 外部連結

[编辑] 參考文獻

Foucault, Michel (1975). Discipline and Punish: the Birth of the Prison, New York: Random House.
Foucault, Michel (1975). Surveiller et punir : Naissance de la prison, Paris : Gallimard.