Persian
Language
Geographical Research is Published in Persian Fulltext.
Volume 36, Issue 3 (2021)
GeoRes 2021, 36(3): 333-340 |
Back to browse issues page
Article Type:
Subject:
History
Received: 2021/02/20 | Accepted: 2021/05/22 | Published: 2021/09/21
Received: 2021/02/20 | Accepted: 2021/05/22 | Published: 2021/09/21
How to cite this article
Lashgari E. Understanding the Epistemological Consequences of Governmentality Concept in Cultural Geography. GeoRes 2021; 36 (3) :333-340
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1083-en.html
URL: http://georesearch.ir/article-1-1083-en.html
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Rights and permissions
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Authors
E. Lashgari *
Department of Geography, Yazd University, Iran, Yazd
Abstract (1101 Views)
Introduction: The concept of governmentality was first proposed by Michel Foucault in 1978; Includes the study of techniques, processes, and approaches in which governments control all aspects of citizens' lives. The formulation of this concept in the humanities and social sciences, including cultural geography, has epistemological consequences which have changed cultural geography's position among other branches of human geography. This article attempted to rely on the interpretive method and within the framework of governmentality, concepts were explored the epistemological consequences of this concept in cultural geography.
Conclusion: The research findings indicate that in the context of governmentality; Genealogy becomes an important tool in recognizing the cultural geography symbols and processes. However, the genealogy of political power is not possible without considering the political economy paleontology and as result, discontinuity is part of political economy nature. Hence the epistemology of cultural geography leads to relativism. On this basis, none of the characteristics such as nature, necessity, totality, and eternity like natural laws and the real perceptions attached to it do apply to relative phenomena in cultural geography. At the same time, recognizing the ideal processes and symbols that seek criticism and replacement with the existing culture is important. Hence, in cultural geography influenced by governmentality, it is considered important to study the marginalized social class.
Conclusion: The research findings indicate that in the context of governmentality; Genealogy becomes an important tool in recognizing the cultural geography symbols and processes. However, the genealogy of political power is not possible without considering the political economy paleontology and as result, discontinuity is part of political economy nature. Hence the epistemology of cultural geography leads to relativism. On this basis, none of the characteristics such as nature, necessity, totality, and eternity like natural laws and the real perceptions attached to it do apply to relative phenomena in cultural geography. At the same time, recognizing the ideal processes and symbols that seek criticism and replacement with the existing culture is important. Hence, in cultural geography influenced by governmentality, it is considered important to study the marginalized social class.
Keywords:
References
1. Ahmadvand S (2007). Hegel's political philosophy and modernity. Public Law Research. 9(23):1-16. [Persian]. [Link]
2. Afzali R, Badeei Azandahi M, Zaki Y, Keyani V (2014). Reterritorializing geopolitical discourse. World Politics. 3(4):29-55. [Persian]. [Link]
3. Asadi R, Rahnama MR, Kharazmei OA (2015). Genealogical futurology, an appropriate approach in the futurology of geographical phenomena. Journal of Geographical Studies of Arid Zone. 6(22):54-71. [Persian]. [Link]
4. Brenner N, Elden S (2001). Henri Lefebvre in contexts: An Introduction. Antipode. 33(5):763-768. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/1467-8330.00215]
5. Chandhoke N (1995). State and civil society: Exploration in political theory. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. [Link]
6. Dean M (2010). Governance: Power and rule in modern society. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. [Link] [DOI:10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01472_2.x]
7. Dreyfus H, Rabinow P (2008). Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics. Basherieyeh H, translator. Tehran: Nye publisher. [Persian] [Link]
8. Elden S (2007). There is a politics of space because space is political: Henri Lefebvre and the production of space. Radical Philosophy Review. 10(2):101-116. [Link] [DOI:10.5840/radphilrev20071022]
9. Ettlinger N (2011). Governmentality as epistemology. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 101(3):537-560. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/00045608.2010.544962]
10. Foucault M (1999). Discipline and Punish: The birth of prison. Sarkhoush N, Jahandedeh A, translators. Tehran: Nye Publisher. [Persian]. [Link]
11. Foucault M (2004). Security, territory, population. Paris: SEUIL. [French] [Link]
12. Giddens A (2004). Sociology. Sabouri M, translator. Tehran: Nye Publisher. [Persian] [Link]
13. Jahanbagloo R (1995). Modernity, democracy and intellectuals. Tehran: Markaz Publisher. [Persian] [Link]
14. Javan J, Daleil S, Salmani Moghadam M (2013). Space dialectics from Lefebvre. Journal of Arid Regions Geographic Studies. 3(12):1-17. [Persian] [Link]
15. Kermani Nasrabadi M, Delavari A (2016). From ideology to discourse: Subject, power and truth. Journal of Social Science. 23(74):111-148. [Persian] [Link]
16. Lashgari Tafrashi E, Ahmadi SA (2016). Princioles of cultural geography with emmphasis on cultural geography of Iran. Tehran: SAMT. [Persian] [Link]
17. Layder D (1997). Modern social theory: Key debates and new direction. London: Psychology Press. [Link]
18. Lemke T, Casper M, Moore LJ (2011). Biopolitics: An advanced introduction. New York: NYU Press. [Link]
19. Lincoln Bruce (2001). Discourse and society. Azodanlou H, translator. Tehran: Nye Publisher. [Persian] [Link]
20. Lorimer H (2008). Cultural geography: non- representational condition and concerns. Progress in Human Geography. 32(4). [Link] [DOI:10.1177/0309132507086882]
21. Martin J (2005). Cultural geography; a critical dictionary of key concepts. London: Routledge. [Link]
22. Mojtahedzadeh P (2005). Political and geopolitical geography (general and Iran). Tehran: Payame Noor University. [Persian] [Link]
23. Mouffe C (2012). On the politic. Ansari M, translator. Tehran: Roukhdad-e Nou. [Persian] [Link]
24. Murdoch Jonathan (2013). Poststructuralist geography. Afzali R, Gharahbeygei M, translator. Tehran: Zeytoun Sabz. [Persian] [Link]
25. Parker J (2007). Structuration. Ghazeyan H, translator. Tehran: Nye publisher. [Link]
26. Pourahmad A (2006). The realm and philosophy of geography. Tehran: Tehran University Press. [Persian]. [Link]
27. Radic H (2008). The development state under global neoliberalism. Third World Quarterly. 29(6):1153-1174. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/01436590802201121]
28. Ritzer G, Stepnisky J (2010). Contemporary sociological theory and its classical roots. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications. [Link]
29. Schmitt C (2013). The concept of the political. Safari S, translator. Tehran: Negahe Moaser publisher. [Persian]. [Link]
30. Shahverdi A, Meshkat M (2017) Transition necessities of the soul in Hegel's phenomenology. Quarterly Journal of Philosophical Meditation. (18):103-124. [Persian] [Link]
31. Smart B (2006). Michel Foucault. Joafshani L, Chavosheyan H, translator. 2nd Edition. Tehran: Ameh. [Persian] [Link]
32. Soroush A (1997). A lesson in the philosophy of social science: The method of interpretation in the social sciences. Tehran: Nye Publication. [Persian]. [Link]
33. Taylor PJ (2006). Radical political geographies. In: Agnew J, Mitchell K, Toal G. A companion to political geography. 3rd Edition. London: Blackwell Publishing. [Link]