Biopower Today
Biopower Today
复制标题
今日生物能源
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
N. Rose
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Rabinow;N. Rose
在这篇文章中，我们进行一些概念上的澄清的概念，生物权力和生物政治学，并认为他们在当代分析的效用。我们认为福柯的这些概念的发展，并区分他的观点，这是接近我们的，从哲学上采取的条款由乔治阿甘本和安东尼奥内格里。我们认为，生物能源需要一个或多个关于活着的人类的“生命”特征的真理话语;一系列被认为有能力说出真理的权威;以生命和健康的名义干预集体存在的策略;以及主观化的模式，其中个人以个人或集体生命或健康的名义对自己进行工作。我们认为，虽然特殊形式的生物权力，特别是在专制独裁的条件下，并结合一定的技术资源，可以导致一个杀人的“死亡政治”-政治的死亡-生物权力在当代国家采取不同的形式。它典型地包含了“让死”（laissez mourir）和“让活”（faire vivre）之间的关系，也就是说，管理生活的策略。使用我们自己目前研究的例子，我们认为生物能源的最新发展围绕三个主题：种族，人口和生殖，基因组医学。
In this article we undertake some conceptual clarification of the concepts of biopower and biopolitics, and argue for their utility in contemporary analysis. We consider Foucault's development of these concepts, and differentiate his view, which is close to ours, from the philosophical take-up of the terms by Giorgio Agamben and Antonio Negri. Biopower, we suggest, entails one or more truth discourses about the ‘vital’ character of living human beings; an array of authorities considered competent to speak that truth; strategies for intervention upon collective existence in the name of life and health; and modes of subjectification, in which individuals work on themselves in the name of individual or collective life or health. We argue that, while exceptional forms of biopower, especially in conditions of absolutist dictatorship, and when combined with certain technical resources, can lead to a murderous ‘thanatopolitics’—a politics of death—biopower in contemporary states takes a different form. It characteristically entails a relation between ‘letting die’ (laissez mourir) and making live (faire vivre)—that is to say strategies for the governing of life. Using examples from our own current research, we consider recent developments in biopower around three themes: race, population and reproduction, and genomic medicine.