Suchergebnisse

This article explores the relationship between neoliberalism & behaviorist psychology. Working our way back to the wellsprings of liberal thought in Jeremy Bentham & John Stuart Mill, we find it was the Utilitarians who laid the foundations for the liberal economy & a new psychology that presents the individual as the product of interaction with his environment. By progressively incorporating the contributions of Darwinian evolutionism, this behaviorist school eventually became the reigning paradigm of American psychology. J. Watson and, above all, B. F. Skinner gave this school, by turns, an educational & reeducational orientation. By demonstrating through experiments the superiority of positive reinforcement to punitive systems, they developed a technology of behavioral control. What this conception of psychology has in common with contemporary neoliberalism is an ideology of social control based on the necessary rationality of human behavior & on consumption as the main positive reinforcement system. Adapted from the source document.

The object of this article is to reclaim the analyses outlined by Foucault on the social extension of the theoretical model of the competitive liberal market. These analyses are based on the evolution of the judicial, moral, and psychological categorization of responsibility. This categorization depends on two kinds of processes: the transformations of the concept of penal responsibility since the early 19th century, notably under the influence of psychiatric expertise, and the infinite assignation of responsibility to subjects in regard to themselves, using the tools of neoliberal government. The author feels able to isolate from this analysis a chiastic structure, situated at the heart of normative regimes belonging to the policies of contemporary criminality. Adapted from the source document.

Far from always surprised by its novelty, the 'neo'-liberalism presents itself at first as a series of 'lessons' or even 'regressions' to an old capitalist society that was believed bygone: resurgence of precarious forms and extreme exploitation of wage labor, exaltation of the employer's leadership, stigmatizing 'helped' and undeserving poor, financial globalization (holds great crises like that of 2008, quite similar to the crash of 1929), etc. Of course, the industrial bases of capitalism have largely transformed since the Second Industrial Revolution and Taylorism is not emerged unscathed from the 20th century. But there is concern that the discourse of 'novelty' neoliberal only supplies the neoliberals themselves which of the inter-war years, intended to rebuild the 'old' Manchesterian liberalism. After thirty years of Galore-Nantes studies, appears to have been made widely around the neoliberal subject (its intellectual origins, its social and political actors, his grip on the ruling elite, its congruence with the safe authoritarianism etc.) of the time, that can one add? Fertilized three lines, however, be relieved of all of these works, which are all end points as analytical outlook on this subject so ample and if fleeing a time, almost imperceptible, which only reduces or has a doctrine nor has an ideology, or to a series of institutions, but through them all as a set of ratio-penalty charges as plastics that - often - relentless. Adapted from the source document.