Subjugated Knowledges

What does Foucault mean by “subjugated knowledges”? And how is it significant for law? Michel Foucault, an eminent theorist in the sphere of philosophy and other social disciplines, studied the social elements within our society that accumulate and catalyse to produce certain structures and regimes. Within his studies relating to the norms and values that constitute society, Foucault coined the term ‘subjugated knowledge’ in his writing, ‘Two Lectures’ (1980) . By this, Foucault refers to those truths and knowledges that are held by minority of individuals in a culture/society (Foucault 1980). Subjugated knowledges struggle against hegemonic knowledges or what Foucault refers to as “savoir des gens’, in order override them and be deemed as legitimate (Foucault 1980, p. 82). This often means that they must counteract the political and government knowledges embedded in our society (Foucault 1980, p. 84). This can prove quite difficult as knowledges are given merit by the power that backs them, subsequently people with powerful positions can influence presiding discourse (Foucault 1980, p. 88). Subjugated knowledges often bring to light the historical feuds that ensued to promote today’s dominant values, that are typically discerned as systematised and conventional. These dominant knowledges are postulated as possessing a universal quality, as if these values are common sense for all humans, when in reality they are culturally contingent (Foucault 1980, p. 82). Hegemonic knowledges are attributed merit by delegitimising other subjugated knowledges (Foucault 1980, p. 83). To disqualify subjugated knowledges, the lack of scientific credibility and validity supporting it is highlighted and therefore, the knowledge starts to be seen as a conspiracy rather than a truth (Foucault 1980, p. 84). Subjugated knowledges pose a threat to the dominant discourse as with enough endorsing and influence they can recolonise the norms and supersede current popular knowledges, simultaneously transforming those popular knowledges into subjugated knowledges. In relation to law, the government overtime, influences society to view laws as hemogenic knowledges, portraying them as congruent with our innate and inherent values, in the process delegitimising subjugated knowledges. An example of this, is the previous illegality of homosexual activity in Victoria prior to the 1980s. By criminalising homosexuality, the government reinforced that the notion of it, was to be looked upon as abnormal. Subsequently, concurrently, the belief that homosexuality was normal was a subjugated knowledge and the belief that it was wrong, was a hegemonic knowledge. However, today with the decriminalisation of it, and the legalisation of same-sex marriage, homosexuality is seen as ordinary, indicating that it is now hegemonic, whilst seeing homosexuality as wrong, is a subjugated knowledge. Evidently, the influence of the law in promoting certain beliefs and guiding certain discourse is clear. The politicians within the government and judicial system have the ability to do this because their role grants power and authority. In ‘Two Lectures’, Foucault (1980, p. 85) suggests that society associates people with power, as having accurate truths and subsequently knowledges. Therefore, society is more inclined to accept and abide to the knowledges and laws of politicians, establishing them as hegemonic knowledges. ‘Two Lectures’ (1980) explores how, these political knowledges are always battling against each in order to be assumed as the truth and become dominant knowledges. Utilitarian knowledges against liberalist knowledges against naturalist knowledges, the struggle is evident. Seemingly, the conflict between knowledges is never stable, rather it is a constant turmoil to become hegemonic and avoid subjugation.