The former and the latter share some common ground in that both agree there is no central core of meaning holding culture together but they differ in that deconstruction focuses primarily on the slipperiness of language while Post-Structuralism is a big broad tent that includes deconstruction and very many other …

A last important characteristic of post-structuralism is the decentered subject. The post-structuralist texts are rejecting the traditional view of a coherent identity and are supporting instead a illogical and decentered self, a self full of contradictions and paradoxes.

Some of the key assumptions underlying Post-Structuralism include: The concept of “self” as a singular and coherent entity is a fictional construct, and an individual rather comprises conflicting tensions and knowledge claims (e.g. gender, class, profession, etc).

Postmodernism is a grab bag term that applies to many different things that come after modernism. Post-structuralism is one of the things that comes after modernism. The name “post-structuralism” gives it a firmer meaning than “post-modernism” and locates it within a French tradition.

Sarup, Jacques Lacan, Jacques Derrida, and Michel Foucault constitute the leading post-structuralists. They share anti-scientific position and question the status of science itself, and the possibility of objectivity of any language of description or analysis.

Derrida contends that all being and all thought is made possible by différance. In order for difference to be operative in language, there must, he argues, be at work in being a more primordial process that distinguishes one thing from another in time and space.

Writers whose works are often characterised as post-structuralist include: Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida, Michel Foucault, Gilles Deleuze, Judith Butler, Jean Baudrillard and Julia Kristeva, although many theorists who have been called “post-structuralist” have rejected the label.

Foucault’s philosophy was mainly social criticism rather than the theory of self-creation associated with existentialism. However, in his own life, he became notorious for unconventional and spontaneous behavior in ways that the public has associated with existentialism.

Foucault’s theories primarily address the relationship between power and knowledge, and how they are used as a form of social control through societal institutions.

Michel Foucault was one of the most famous thinkers of the late 20th century, achieving celebrity-like status before his untimely death in 1984. This unusual title was created because of the distinctive nature of Foucault’s work, which straddled disciplines such as philosophy, history, and politics.

In philosophy and classical rhetoric, episteme is the domain of true knowledge–in contrast to doxa, the domain of opinion, belief, or probable knowledge. French philosopher and philologist Michel Foucault (1926-1984) used the term episteme to indicate the total set of relations that unite a given period.

Governmentality, an expression originally formulated by the 20th-century French philosopher Michel Foucault, combines the terms government and rationality. It also refers to the “conduct of oneself” where a sense of self-governance is a guiding force.

Based on what we learned in class, “doxa” refers to common belief and popular opinion, while “episteme” is portrayed as more of a justified, true belief. Episteme differs from doxa in this sense, it deals with less subjective views and uses objective observations to make arguments more substantial.

Foucault challenges the idea that power is wielded by people or groups by way of ‘episodic’ or ‘sovereign’ acts of domination or coercion, seeing it instead as dispersed and pervasive. ‘Power is everywhere’ and ‘comes from everywhere’ so in this sense is neither an agency nor a structure (Foucault 1998: 63).

It is an analysis of the social and theoretical mechanisms behind the changes that occurred in Western penal systems during the modern age based on historical documents from France. Foucault argues that prison did not become the principal form of punishment just because of the humanitarian concerns of reformists.

‘Where there is power, there is resistance, and yet, or rather consequently, this resistance is never in a position of exteriority in relation to power’ (Foucault, 1978: 95-96). In human sciences one of the main issues has always been the relationship of resistance to power.

Foucault emphasizes that power is not discipline, rather discipline is simply one way in which power can be exercised. He also uses the term ‘disciplinary society’, discussing its history and the origins and disciplinary institutions such as prisons, hospitals, asylums, schools and army barracks.

There, Foucault says: “Where there is power, there is resistance, and yet, or rather consequently, this resistance is never in a position of exteriority in relation to power.”

For Foucault, biopower is a technology of power for managing humans in large groups; the distinctive quality of this political technology is that it allows for the control of entire populations.

Within this theoretical framework of Foucault, the notion of “biopolitics” is closely related to the concept of “biopower” (biopouvoir), which refers to a specific mode of power relations. This type of power is not without a certain distinct historical and theoretical complexity.

Biopolitics is the exertion of state control over the functions and processes of life. To give an example, the current battle in the United States over women’s reproductive rights (abortion, birth control, etc) is an example of biopolitics, and the force exerted by biopolitcs over women’s bodies is biopower.

Biopolitics is an intersectional field between human biology and politics. It is a political wisdom taking into consideration the administration of life and a locality’s populations as its subject. To quote Michel Foucault, it is “to ensure, sustain, and multiply life, to put this life in order.”

Biopower is produced when organic material is converted into a gaseous fuel or oil or burned directly to generate electricity. The steam is captured by a turbine and then converted into electricity by a generator.

Pros and cons of biomass

In coal-fired power plants, bituminous coal, subbituminous coal, or lignite is burned. The heat produced by the combustion of the coal is used to convert water into high-pressure steam, which drives a turbine, which produces electricity.

Biomass and biofuels made from biomass are alternative energy sources to fossil fuels—coal, petroleum, and natural gas. Burning either fossil fuels or biomass releases carbon dioxide (CO2), a greenhouse gas.