Foucault News

News and resources on French thinker Michel Foucault (1926-1984)

PhD course: Foucault: Organization, Technology, and Subject-formation

LINK to the course site: https://phdsupport.nemtilmeld.dk/250/

Date and time
Monday 1 June at 09:00 to Thursday 4 June 2026 at 16:00

Registration Deadline
26th April 2026 at 23:55

Submission of papers deadline
20th May 2026

Location
Room TBA, Campus TBA, 2000 Frederiksberg, Denmark

Course coordinator: Kaspar Villadsen, Department of Business Humanities and Law (BHL)

Organizer
CBS PhD School, Nina Iversen, Phone: +45 3815 2475, ni.research@cbs.dk

Faculty

Professor Sverre Raffnsøe
Department of Business Humanities and Law, CBS

Associate Professor Marius Gudmand-Høyer
Department of Business Humanities and Law, CBS

Associate Professor Troels Krarup

Professor (mso) Kaspar Villadsen
Department of Business Humanities and Law, CBS

Prerequisites
Only PhD students can participate in the course.
Deadline for registration is 26th April 2026.
Participation requires submission of a short paper (see more below). Papers must be in English and deadline is 20th May 2026.

It is a precondition for receiving the course diploma that the PhD student attends the whole course.

Aim
The course will provide the participants with:

  1.  An introduction to key analytical potentials reconstructed from Foucault’s wide-ranging authorship as well as the lecturers’ own research projects.
  2. In particular, we will discuss different approaches to themes of organization, technology, and subject-formation as they are deployed in state-of-the-art Foucault-inspired scholarship.
  3. The potentials and limits of the particular way Foucauldian analytics can be applied in the participant’s research will be discussed. Hence, a range of analytical resources and potentials will be explored and discussed in relation to the participants’ current research.

Course content

Michel Foucault’s work continues to offer a major source of inspiration for PhD projects across a wide range of disciplinary domains. This PhD course explores how Foucault’s work speaks to three broad themes in contemporary business school research and beyond: Organization, technology, and subject-formation. The lecturers on the course have all pursued substantive research on these themes, drawing upon different parts of Foucault’s authorship, and they will base their teaching on this research experience. A key aim of the course is that the participants acquire an effective overview of analytical possibilities in Foucault’s work, effective for selecting and deploying such analytics in their own research.

Overall, Foucault’s thinking can help to inquire into the organizations, technologies and techniques of self-formation that make up the conditions of possibility for our contemporary experiences. First, Foucault’s usual genealogical approach (Foucault 1977, 1984) works by tracing how contemporary forms of organization emerged from past struggles, political strategies, and accidental events. From this perspective, the prevailing modes of organizing can be better grasped by recovering their historical conditions of emergence and dispersion. Genealogy takes as its basic premise that history, as well as our present, is a site of evolving struggle, including contest over divergent interpretations, which the development of modern modes of organizing and managing clearly displays. Hence, struggles around definitions and uses of appropriate management, leadership, accountability, transparency or sustainability make up pertinent material for genealogical inquiry.

Foucault developed his own notion of technology during the 1970s, namely the concept of “the dispositive”. A dispositive is defined as a historical configuration, which connects a series of discursive and non-discursive elements such as laws, practices, material artefacts, procedures, and techniques (Foucault, 1980). It designates a propensity in knowledge production and social practice as well as a “dispositionality” in how institutions emerge and transform. The concept opens for analyzing how our practices – for example, risk assessments or anti-pandemic strategies – are conditioned by dispositives that have been formed in historical processes often spanning several centuries. Foucault (2007) suggested that the dispositives of law, discipline and security have been particularly important as responses to thorny governmental problems such as crime, infectious diseases, population welfare, and labor unrest. Current problems such as climate change, environmental degradation and extreme inequality could be analyzed as straddling between these deep-rooted frameworks of calculation, intervention and rationalization. The dispositive has recently been introduced into Foucauldian scholarship as a highly promising analytical resource, and the course will explore how it can be used for empirical inquiries.

Finally, Foucault’s late authorship in the early 1980s, often termed his “ethical turn”, took him back to techniques of self-formation in Early Christianity and Greco-Roman antiquity. There, Foucault noticed a “technical” notion of ethics less defined by submission to universal moral codes and instead focused more on the self’s work upon the self.

Foucault’s attention to ethics in the early 1980s hardly signified a departure from political issues, but a re-conception of politics as an ethical politics. The work on your own freedom that ethics comprise is political, Foucault argued, in the sense that our self-fashioning involves what we are willing to accept or want to change in ourselves as well as in our circumstances: “[T]here is no first or final point of resistance to political power other than in the relationship one has to oneself” (Foucault, 2005: 252). Perhaps, the urgent issues of our time call for developing another form of ethics rather than models rooted in legal frameworks and Christian morality. The recent emergence of responsible consumers, ‘life-long learners’, climate conscious youths, “freeganism”, and fluid gender identity could be analyzed with inspiration from Foucault’s work on ethics and self-formation. An analytical key task that will be addressed in this part of the course is how to integrating Foucault’s notion of technology, the dispositive, with his analysis of self-technology, hence bridging the mid-career Foucault’s analytics of power with the late Foucault’s ethics.

The theme of this PhD course requires that the participants engage in some way with Foucault’s historical work, his analytical frameworks, his concepts, or his approach to organization, technology, and subjectivity. Papers that are not underpinned exclusively by Foucauldian analytics but also derive from other thinkers and traditions are welcome too. Our point of departure is that Foucauldian analytics is not only pertinent to philosophical research, since such analytics can also find application in ethnographic, sociological, organizational, historical, and anthropological research.

Teaching style
The goal is to sharpen the participants’ knowledge of the Foucauldian toolbox of analytical resources and how these can be applied in PhD projects. To that end we will set aside sufficient time to carefully examine and discuss the papers submitted by the participants. The course will consist of both workshops and lectures/presentations by scholars who are specialist in Foucault’s work and subsequent Foucauldian scholarship. The goal of the lectures is, first, to clarify the ways in which Foucault worked with his most significant analytics and, second, to demonstrate how to put the analytics at work in specific analysis. The aim of the workshops is to explore how Foucauldian analytics function (or possible may be employed) in each participant’s research – with the aim of strengthening, deepening and nuancing the participants’ dissertations or research articles. In the workshops, the course participants are divided into smaller groups (using shared topics and/or approaches as choice criteria) enabling a substantial peer discussion of both paper and their research project. Each workshop will be supervised and organized by one of lecturers.

All participants are required to submit a paper that deals with the key theme(s) of the PhD project in question. Papers that apply Foucauldian analytics to empirical problems in a variety of domains are welcomed, but so are papers that draw upon other thinkers and traditions. Perhaps the PhD student is interested in considering whether it would be interesting to include perspectives drawn from Foucault and Foucauldian scholarship in their PhD project.

It is possible to submit two kinds of papers. The first option is a short paper/abstract, which briefly presents the PhD student’s project and perhaps poses some questions regarding how it could include perspectives from Foucault. The second option is to submit a brief paper (5-10 pages), which presents the PhD project and some key theoretical and/or empirical considerations, and it can perhaps include notions from Foucault such as power, knowledge, governmentality, technologies of power, self-technology, etc.  The key idea is that each participant will take home lots of beneficial inputs to his/her PhD project based on a discussion of challenges and potentials in the project.

Papers must be in English.

Learning objectives

  • Achieve a strong reflexivity regarding how the choice of analytics from Foucault’s authorship brings certain questions, problems, entities and processes into the foreground of analysis and critical consideration.
  • Awareness of different ways of working with Foucauldian analytics in PhD dissertations, articles and academic writing in general. This awareness will particular concern and be exemplified by the themes of organization, technology, and subjectivity. However, as mentioned above, these themes are not exclusive.
  • The course will increase participant’s critical ability to account for the potential role of Foucauldian analytics, in general, and how it is applied in the participant’s research, specifically. This reflexivity concerns, inter alia, the epistemological distinctiveness of Foucauldian analytics, the social ontology its assumes, the analytical practices involved in Foucauldian scholarship, and the potential critical effects of such scholarship. Finally, the increased reflexivity relates to the range of Foucauldian analytical resources that can be effectively explored in relation to the participants’ current research.

LINK to full program and registration:
https://phdsupport.nemtilmeld.dk/250/


Lecture plan (provisional)

During the workshops, the participants will be divided into smaller groups each supervised by one of the course teachers.

LITERATURE (to be finalized):

MONDAY:

For lecture 1: What Is Genealogy? (KV)

  • Foucault, M. 2003. ‘Society Must Be Defended’: Lectures at the Collège de France 1975–1976. New York: Picador. [Lectures one and two].
  • Villadsen, K. 2024. Foucault’s Technologies: Another Way of Cutting Reality. Oxford University Press. [Chapter Five, pp. 267-304].

Background, optional:

  • Karlsen, M. P. and K. Villadsen. ‘Foucault, Maoism, Genealogy: The Influence of Political Militancy in Michel Foucault’s Thought’. New Political Science, 37(1): 91–117.

For lecture 2: (KV)

  • Foucault, M. (2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978. New York: Palgrave. [Lectures one and two]. 

For lecture 3: (KV)

  • Villadsen, K. (2021) “‘The Dispositive’: Foucault’s Concept for Organizational Analysis?” Organization Studies, 42(3): 473-494.

TUESDAY:

For lecture 4: Dispositive Proto-Typology [and the notions of governmentality] (MGH)

  • Foucault, M. (2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978. New York: Palgrave (Lectures 1 + Lecture 4, excerpt, pages 106-111].
  • Foucault, M. (2007). Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France 1977–1978. New York: Palgrave. (Lecture 3).

Background, optional:

  • Raffnsøe, S., M. Gudmand-Høyer, M. S. Thaning: “Chapt. 7: The Governmentalization of the State”, excerpt: 2. The early linage of governmentality and dispositional analysis; 3. Later developments in the notion of governmentality, pp. 236-258, in: Id.: Foucault: A Research Companion.New York & London: Palgrave, 2016.

For lecture 5: The subject and Subjectivation (KV)

  • Foucault, M. (1982) “The Subject and Power.” Critical Inquiry, 8(4): 777-795.
  • Villadsen, K. (2024) “‘The Subject and Power’ – Four Decades Later: Tracing Foucault’s Evolving Concept of Subjectivation.” Foucault Studies, (36): 293–321. Available at: https://rauli.cbs.dk/index.php/foucault-studies/article/view/7220

Background, optional:

  • Villadsen, K. (2023) “Goodbye Foucault’s ‘Missing Human Agent’?: Self-formation, Capability and the Dispositifs.” European Journal of Social Theory, 26(1): 67–89. 

For short lecture 6: Veridiction and Security in The Birth of Biopolitics (MGH):

  • Foucault, M. (2007) The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1978–1979. New York: Palgrave. (Lecture 2 and Lecture 10 + beginning of Lecture 11).

WEDNESDAY:

For lecture 7: The (Lost) Object of Problematization (MGH)

  • Foucault, M. (2014) “Interview with André Berten, May 7, 1981”, pp. 235-246 in: Wrong-Doing, Truth-Telling: The function of avowal in justice.The University of Chicago Press.
  • Lecture 1, excerpt (pp. 1-6) of Foucault, M. (2010). The Government of Self and Others. Lectures at the Collège de France 1982-1983.New York/London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010.

Background, optional:

  • Excerpts (Introduction, pp. 1-15 + Part 2, pp. 33-42) from Gudmand-Høyer and Kogut (2025; work in progress): “The (lost) object of problematization analysis: A comprehensive review of a central notion in Michel Foucault’s later work (1975-1984)”.

For short lecture 9: From vital politics to human capital investing:

  • Foucault, M. (2007) The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France 1978–1979. New York: Palgrave. (Lecture 6 and Lecture 9).

For lecture 10: Critique à la Foucault (SR):

  • Foucault, Michel ([1980] 1994), “Le philosophe masqué,” in Michel Foucault (1994), Dits et écrits. Volume IV (Paris: Gallimard): 104-115// Foucault, Michel (1994), “The Masked Philosopher”, in Michel Foucault (1994), The Essential Foucault: Selections from Essential Works of Foucault, 1954-1984, edited by Paul Rabinow and Nikolas Rose (New York: The New Press): 174-179
  • Foucault, Michel ([1978] 2015), Qu’est-ce que la critique? Suivie de La culture de soi, Édition établie par H.-P. Fruchaud et D. Lorenzini, Introduction et apparat critique par D. Lorenzini et A.I. Davidson, (Paris: Vrin): 33-80 // Foucault, Michel ([1978] 2024), What Is Critique? & The Culture of the Self. Edited by Henri-Paul Fruchaud, Daniele Lorenzini, and Arnold I. Davidson. Trans. Clare O’Farrell, (Chicago: University of Chicago Press): 19-61
  • Butler, Judith ([2000] 2004), “What is Critique? An essay on Foucault’s Virtue,” in Judith Butler (2004), The Judith Butler Reader, edited by Sara Salih. Malden (USA; Oxford, UK; Carlton, Australia: Blackwell Publishing).

Background, optional:

  • Raffnsøe, Sverre; Gudmand-Høyer, Marius; Thaning, Morten (2016): “Foucault’s dispositive: The perspicacity of dispositive analytics in organizational research,” Organization: 23(2) 2016: 272–298
  • Latour, Bruno (2004): “Why has Critique Run out of Steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern,” Critical Inquiry 30 [Winter 2004), pp. 225-248.
  • Raffnsøe, Sverre; Mennicken, Andrea; Miller, Peter (2019): “The Foucault Effect in organization studies,” journal Organization Studies, 2019, Vol. 40(2): 155–182.
  • Staunæs, Dorthe; Raffnsøe, Sverre; Brøgger, Katja (2025), “Affirmative critique as counter-archiving and an-archiving: For another academic freedom to come,” journal Educational Philosophy and Theory, https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2025.2500373/ https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00131857.2025.2500373?af=R#abstract
  • Raffnsøe, Sverre; Staunæs, Dorthe; Bank, Mads (2022): “Affirmative Critique,” in Theory and Politics in Organizations, Volume 22(3): 183-217.

Additional suggested readings:

Foucault, M. (1991). Questions of method. In G. Burchell, C. Gordon, & P. Miller (eds.), The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality Chicago: University of Chicago Press; 73-86.

Foucault, M. (1998) ‘On the Genealogy of Ethics’. In Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth: Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984. Vol. 1, by Michel Foucault, pp. 253-280. London: Penguin.

Foucault, M. (2007) Security, Territory, Population: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1977-78. Springer, 2007.

Foucault, M. (2008) The Birth of Biopolitics: Lectures at the Collège de France, 1978-1979. Springer, 2008.

Koopman, Colin. Genealogy as critique: Foucault and the problems of modernity. Indiana University Press, 2013.

Raffnsøe S., Gudmand-Høyer M., Thaning M.S. (2016) Foucault’s dispositive: The perspicacity of dispositive analytics in organizational research. Organization, 23(2): 272-298.

Raffnsøe, S., Gudmand-Høyer, M. T., & Thaning, M. S. (2016) Michel Foucault: A Research Companion. Palgrave Macmillan.

Foucault, M. (1984) ‘On the Genealogy of Ethics: An Overview of Work in Progress’. The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon Books, pp. 340-372.

Foucault, M (1993) About the Beginning of the Hermeneutics of the Self: Two Lectures at Dartmouth. Political Theory, 21(2) 198–227.

Foucault, M. (1980) ‘The Confession of the Flesh’. In Power/Knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977, ed. C. Gordon, pp. 194-240. New York: Pantheon Books.

See website for further details concerning participation and registration.

Joshua Penrod, Ethics and Biopower in Neuromarketing. A Framework for an Ethical Approach to Marketing, Springer, 2023

About this book
This book explores the ethical and policy implications of the use of neuroscience in marketing. Addressing emerging areas of neuromarketing and consumer neuroscience, this book offers a fresh perspective on establishing a framework for codes of conduct for marketing practices using neuroscientific methods. The use of neuroscience, particularly in commercial and marketing contexts, has been fraught with controversy and ethical concerns. Technological advances have enhanced the ability to not only analyze but also predict (or even control) human behavior.

Using the work of Foucault on biopower, the author discusses the moral dimensions of data collection and observation of consumer behavior in neuromarketing as well as policy implications. After discussing the strengths and weaknesses of various ethical frameworks, the author proposes fixes to current ethical and conduct codes for a more seamless approach for governance. This book advances the scholarship on marketing ethics and appeals to researchers of consumer psychology, business ethics, and public policy.

Joshua Penrod is an adjunct professor in the Department of Marketing and Entrepreneurship, Merrick School of Business at the University of Baltimore, USA. Josh also serves on the senior leadership team of a global trade association, with duties including strategy, marketing, science and technology policy, negotiation, management, and leadership. He earned his Ph.D. from Virginia Tech, USA.

Kristina Vera-Phillips, (2025), I Would Rather Die: Postcolonial Analysis of Rebellion Speeches in Star Wars: Andor. The Journal of Popular Culture, 58: 267-273.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jpcu.70003

ABSTRACT
In Star Wars: Andor, the choice for prisoners of Narkina 5 was clear: freedom or death. Two critical speeches from the Narkina 5 prison episodes demonstrate how to disrupt the power of the Empire and the human cost of rebellion. There are parallels between these speeches and the history of rebellion on Earth. This paper will use these speeches to explore the dynamics of ruling class power and countermovements through an approach grounded in postcolonial and critical race theories. This project explores the implications of rebellion speech for characters in science fiction and marginalized people in real life.

Hentyle Yapp, “Not To Be Governed Like This”: Ai Weiwei, Foucault, and Illiberal Representation, Public Culture, 11 February 2026.
https://doi.org/10.1215/08992363-12175774

Abstract
In expressing critique, the main model for understanding the merits of such expressions is through a liberal democratic tradition with its ideas of free speech. Regardless of whether discontent is expressed through aesthetic or political means, it is primarily framed through a logic of representation and the presumption that the means of expression directly mediate and thus properly represent one’s perspective. Under the governance structure of liberalism and its domination as a global logic, most expressions of discontent, from aesthetic to political, become equivalent and primarily legible through a democratic aesthetics. Within the provincial logics of Western democracies that saturate our understandings of the transnational, those nations without proper individualized voting rights or space to perform and enact frank speech are seen as illiberal and unmodern. This is because the tacit benchmark for our ideas of governance and law come to be inherited from a liberal formula that relies on democratic representation as the mode for political representation.

This essay examines other ways to understand governance and law beyond liberalism. The author uses the aesthetic to not only trace the dominance of democratic logics but also reconsider them through the illiberal. The author turns to the work of Ai Weiwei, engaging his 2019 sculpture Declaration of the Rights of Man and the Citizen Cut in Nine Pieces. Ai’s work allows us to understand how our fields often approach the aesthetic as a proxy form of free speech and how we might expand what the aesthetic can do in relation to governance.

David M. Halperin, Foucault’s Queer Critique, In The Routledge Companion to Queer Literary Studies, ed. Melissa E. Sanchez, Routledge 2025.

A preliminary version of this chapter can be found online here.

First paragraphs (extract)
Critique has fallen out of favor lately among exponents of queer theory as well as among participants in the recent debates in literary studies over reading methods. Critique often finds itself displaced, or replaced, in such contexts by one or another version of something called “postcritique.” And so it happens that a tradition of intellectual and political contestation dating back to the European Renaissance and Reformation, which came to be identified with enlightened resistance to modern forms of knowledge and power, now meets with routine expressions of contempt from those who style themselves as adherents of insurgent intellectual or academic movements that aspire to function as cutting-edge vehicles of opposition to contemporary practices of rule.

In order to buck that trend, and to rehabilitate critique as a specifically queer enterprise, I appeal to a little-known but dominant theme in the late thought of Michel Foucault. Foucault is often considered one of the founders, or at least one of the intellectual sources, of queer theory. But that is not because of his thinking about critique, or “the critical attitude” (as he liked to call it), much less because of his elaborate genealogies of critique, an activity which he traced back to the ancient Greek world and to the practice and ethos of parrhēsia: a somewhat enigmatic term that signifies unguarded, risky, courageous speech—speech that forthrightly, even defiantly, conveys the speaker’s sincere beliefs and articulates an unsafe truth.
[…]

Antoinette Rouvroy, Thomas Berns, Translated by Liz Carey-Libbrecht (2013). Algorithmic Governmentality and Prospects of Emancipation Disparateness as a Precondition for Individuation Through Relationships? Réseaux, No 177(1), 163-196.
https://doi.org/10.3917/res.177.0163.

Extract
The new opportunities for statistical aggregation, analysis and correlation afforded by big data are taking us away from traditional statistical perspectives focused on the average man to “capture” “social reality” as such, directly and immanently, from a perspective devoid of any relation to “the average” or “the norm” [1]. “A-normative objectivity”, or even “tele-objectivity” (Virilio, 2006: 4), the new regime of digital truth, is exemplified by multiple new automatic systems modelling “social reality” [2], both remotely and in real time, compounding the contextualization and automatic personalization of interactions surrounding security, health, administration, business, etc. [3] We here assess to what extent, and with what consequences, the “tele-objectivity” of these algorithmic uses of statistics allows those systems to become mirrors of the most immanent normativities [4] in society, informing all measurement or relation to the norm, all convention and evaluation, as well as allowing those system to contribute to (re)producing and multiplying this immanent normativity (immanent in life itself, Canguilhem would say), albeit by obscuring social normativities, silencing these as far as possible because they cannot be translated digitally.
[…]

Algorithmic governmentality is quite close to what Foucault already had in mind with his concept of security apparatuses:

“The regulator of a milieu, which involved not so much establishing limits and frontiers, or fixing locations, as, above all and essentially, making possible, guaranteeing, and ensuring circulations: the circulation of people, merchandise, and air, etcetera”.
(Foucault, 2009: 51)
[…]

Antoinette Rouvroy, The end(s) of critique. Data behaviourism versus due process. In Mireille Hildebrandt, Katja de Vries (Eds.). (2013). Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn: The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Technology (1st ed.). Routledge.
Book https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203427644

See also this post

Extract
Operations of collection, processing and structuration of data for purposes of datamining and profiling, helping individuals and organizations to cope with circumstances of uncertainty or relieving them from the burden of interpreting events and taking decision in routine, trivial situations have become crucial to public and private sectors’ activities in domains as various as crime prevention, health management, marketing or even entertainment.
[…]
The distance between ‘the world’ and ‘reality’, this ‘unknown part of radical uncertainty’ has always been a challenge for institutions and, at the same times, a precondition for the possibility of critique if, by critique we mean, like Foucault (1990): the virtue consisting in challenging the very categories through which one is predisposed to perceive and evaluate people and situations of the world, rather than merely judging them according to these very categories.
[…]

Anna Nygren, An Archive of Associations: When My Father Bought Foucault’s Old Car, Literary Hub, 13 February 2026.

Anna Nygren on Writing Between Intertextuality, Obsession and Categorization

One day last summer, at my parents’ house on the east coast of Sweden, my dad says he wants to show me something. He pulls out a piece of paper. It’s a certificate of ownership from the National Archives (Riksarkivet), for the car he bought earlier in the summer.

My childhood was full of cars and car parts and things related to cars. My dad is an expert in British old cars. […]

Dad hands me the paper, the certificate of ownership from the National Archives. He has found this by means of thorough archival work. I notice that it says in large red text that the paper must not be folded, but that it obviously has been folded in the middle and I say that to Dad. Dad says that it is the National Archives that folded, he is innocent of the paper abuse. He points to the box where the car owner’s name is written. It says Paul-Michel Foucault.
[…]

Finding Foucault was not easy. Dad tells me about his search for the car’s previous owners. In 1972, the registration number system in Sweden was changed, and the car’s entire previous history disappeared, everything was reset to zero, and it was impossible to find anything about the life of the car before that. But Dad has found a receipt in the car with the previous license plate number, and based on that, he can trace the car back to its birth, where he finds Foucault as the first owner. It is a Work in the Archive.
[…]