Postmodernism: Culture and Theory, Part Three

Finally, Michel Foucault (1926-1984) was a French philosopher, historian, and psychologist. He was a prominent activist toward the middle part of his life. Foucault began his career as a Marxist but later adopted a postmodern perspective. Although to propose a definition of postmodernism is a bit haphazard (Foucault rejected the label), postmodernism entails a theoretical framework that "typically opposes foundationalism, essentialism, and realism" (Audi, 1995).(1) It is interesting to note that Foucault was in direct opposition to the essentialist notions of Jean-Paul Sartre who, toward the latter end of his life, attempted to defend Marxism based solely on existential thinking.

Foucault was concerned with the interrelation of knowledge and power:

"We should admit that power produces knowledge. That power and knowledge directly imply one another. That there is no power relation without the constitution of a field of knowledge, nor any knowledge that does not presuppose and constitute the same power relations" ("The Body of the Condemned," p. 175).

Power, in the Foucauldian sense, is a force that exercises control on the individuals that make up a society. The diffusion of power is often subtle. It is not necessarily coercive. Obedience to power occurs as individuals, as docile bodies, internalize the values and normalcy of a given social system and police themselves. For example, is this the proper way to act? Is this what I should think? Is this action wrong or is it right? Individuals "decide" the answers to such questions based upon the context of their internalization. According to Foucault, there is no truth to be found beyond the limits of the discourse between knowledge and power. It is absolute.

Postmodernism rejects the "old metaphysics" of earlier periods. It argues that power comes from knowledge and the institutions that wield it. This is in direct opposition to the materialist view that power stems from the bourgeoisie and the control of labor. Postmodernism argues that the canonical truth we are accustomed to as being truthful, whatever that might be, is no longer inherent. Postmodernism is anti-positivist in all regards.

To conclude, the arguments against the use of postmodernism in anthropology are as follows: 1) Many anthropologists value human agency. If postmodernism hold true, human agency is impossible in an anthropology that is unable to think outside the nexus of knowledge and power. 2) Anthropologists have long prided themselves on their use to society. However, postmodernism is impractical. It has no utility or function. And, finally, 3) Postmodernism is inconsistent with the "facts," assuming that there are "facts" that exist outside the nexus. These "facts" might include, but are not exclusive to, the existence of culture (of which postmodernism is a part) and human evolution (which occurred long before human knowledge of it).

(1) "In addition to these things that postmodern philosophy is 'against,' it also opposes characterizing this menu of oppositions as relativism, skepticism, or nihilism, and it rejects 'the metaphysics of presence,' the traditional, putatively impossible dream of a complete, unique, and closed explanatory system, an explanatory system fueled by binary oppositions" (Audi, 1995).

References

Audi, R. (1999). The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy. New York: Cambridge Press.

McGee, R. & R. Warms. (2007). Anthropological Theory: An Introductory History. New York: McGraw-Hill.