Periodic Reporting for period 2 - BSPC (Biopolitics, Sovereignty and Political Conflict)
Reporting period: 2024-09-01 to 2025-08-31
My research project is situated within the interdisciplinary field of biopolitics, with a particular emphasis on the question of technology. All the articles I have written show how the issue of technology introduces a new perspective on the aporetic intertwinement of sovereignty and biopolitics, the ideas of resistance and freedom. Pursuing my thesis, I draw upon Jean-Luc Nancy’s notion of technology as an end unto itself.
In my first article, "Technological Re-Foundation of an Affirmative Biopolitics," I have reexamined the relationship between the two heterogenous modalities of power, that is to say, sovereign power and biopolitical power. On the one hand, sovereign power is something negative – it extracts resources, coerces, prohibits, represses, commands, and puts to death; biopolitical power, in contrast, is something positive – it stimulates, enhances, regulates, normalizes, and optimizes the living conditions of individuals and populations. Much of recent research plays the creative, positive potentiality of life against the negative power of sovereignty. By drawing upon Nancy’s idea of technology as an end unto itself, I reconsider affirmatively the aporetic intertwinement of sovereign power and biopolitical power.
In doing so, I also follow the efforts of contemporary political thinkers to think through the ideas of resistance to power mechanism. Philosophers from Foucault to Agamben usually formulate the idea of resistance to power mechanism on the plane of immanence, on the plane of power relations. Thus, they play potentiality against power, potentia against potestas, immanence against transcendence, constituent power against constituted power. To assess critically the biopolitical figures of resistance like Bartleby and multitude, I highlight and reformulate the importance of popular sovereignty.
The article, "Martin Heidegger's Ambiivalent Stance towards Technology," was initially one section of my third article. The reviewrs of my articled suggested to publish it as a separate article. In my article, I call into question the commonplace view that Heidegger wants to preserve a degree of humanity from technology’s grip by retrieving its original sense in the Greek poiesis. Instead, I argue for the view that the non-truths of mastery and dominance open the human being to the “essence” of modern technology as Gestell.
In my last article, "Freedom and Servitude at the Limits of Governmental Technologies," I offer a novel angle from which to re-consider the conflict between technology and life. In my article, I argue that, in Foucault's work, the freedom of a subject emerges from the conflict between technology and life. By a way of contrast, Agamben claims that there is an essential connection between slavery and technology.
In my first article, "Technological Re-Foundation of an Affirmative Biopolitics," I have reexamined the relationship between the two heterogenous modalities of power, that is to say, sovereign power and biopolitical power. On the one hand, sovereign power is something negative – it extracts resources, coerces, prohibits, represses, commands, and puts to death; biopolitical power, in contrast, is something positive – it stimulates, enhances, regulates, normalizes, and optimizes the living conditions of individuals and populations. Much of recent research plays the creative, positive potentiality of life against the negative power of sovereignty. By drawing upon Nancy’s idea of technology as an end unto itself, I reconsider affirmatively the aporetic intertwinement of sovereign power and biopolitical power.
In doing so, I also follow the efforts of contemporary political thinkers to think through the ideas of resistance to power mechanism. Philosophers from Foucault to Agamben usually formulate the idea of resistance to power mechanism on the plane of immanence, on the plane of power relations. Thus, they play potentiality against power, potentia against potestas, immanence against transcendence, constituent power against constituted power. To assess critically the biopolitical figures of resistance like Bartleby and multitude, I highlight and reformulate the importance of popular sovereignty.
The article, "Martin Heidegger's Ambiivalent Stance towards Technology," was initially one section of my third article. The reviewrs of my articled suggested to publish it as a separate article. In my article, I call into question the commonplace view that Heidegger wants to preserve a degree of humanity from technology’s grip by retrieving its original sense in the Greek poiesis. Instead, I argue for the view that the non-truths of mastery and dominance open the human being to the “essence” of modern technology as Gestell.
In my last article, "Freedom and Servitude at the Limits of Governmental Technologies," I offer a novel angle from which to re-consider the conflict between technology and life. In my article, I argue that, in Foucault's work, the freedom of a subject emerges from the conflict between technology and life. By a way of contrast, Agamben claims that there is an essential connection between slavery and technology.
The outgoing phase of my research was carried out at the Deakin University (Australia). The conducted research can be summarized in relation to the work packages.
Work Package 1: The Sovereignty-Biopolitics Knot: I examined Schmitt’s conception of state sovereignty and Foucault’s ethico-social notion notion of power in terms of dispositif. Through the comparison of Schmitt and Foucault's ideas, I outlined the aporetic intertwinement of sovereignty and biopolitics. Drawin upon Nancy’s ideas of technology and sovereignty, I articulate affirmatively the aporetic knot of sovereignty and biopolitics.
Work Package 2: Reviewing Resistance: I argue that the affirmative biopolitics consists of two gestures: the first, Foucauldian one, moves from the politico-metaphysical presupposition of a sovereign subject to the process of an infinite self-constitution and pluralization, and the second, Schmittian one, posits the finite subject of the nothing to interrupt the process of an endless self-constitution and pluralization.
Work Package 3: Rethingking Conflict. I examine the notion of conflict as the conflict between life and technology. First, I argue that Foucault thinks the conflict between life and technology is productive in an affirmative manner, because the condlict contributes to the increase of freedom. Second, and by a way of contrast, Agamben maintains that there is a constitutive connection between technology and slavery, the relation of domination between the slave and the master. My overall aim is to formulate Agamben's critique of Foucault, and then make a critical case against Agamben.
The efforts to disseminate and communicate the action results to diverse audiences can be summarized thus:
4 Peer reviewed publications (2 under review, 2 accepted)
2 Popular publications
8 presentations in international conferences
1 Workshop presentation
1 workshop chair
Work Package 1: The Sovereignty-Biopolitics Knot: I examined Schmitt’s conception of state sovereignty and Foucault’s ethico-social notion notion of power in terms of dispositif. Through the comparison of Schmitt and Foucault's ideas, I outlined the aporetic intertwinement of sovereignty and biopolitics. Drawin upon Nancy’s ideas of technology and sovereignty, I articulate affirmatively the aporetic knot of sovereignty and biopolitics.
Work Package 2: Reviewing Resistance: I argue that the affirmative biopolitics consists of two gestures: the first, Foucauldian one, moves from the politico-metaphysical presupposition of a sovereign subject to the process of an infinite self-constitution and pluralization, and the second, Schmittian one, posits the finite subject of the nothing to interrupt the process of an endless self-constitution and pluralization.
Work Package 3: Rethingking Conflict. I examine the notion of conflict as the conflict between life and technology. First, I argue that Foucault thinks the conflict between life and technology is productive in an affirmative manner, because the condlict contributes to the increase of freedom. Second, and by a way of contrast, Agamben maintains that there is a constitutive connection between technology and slavery, the relation of domination between the slave and the master. My overall aim is to formulate Agamben's critique of Foucault, and then make a critical case against Agamben.
The efforts to disseminate and communicate the action results to diverse audiences can be summarized thus:
4 Peer reviewed publications (2 under review, 2 accepted)
2 Popular publications
8 presentations in international conferences
1 Workshop presentation
1 workshop chair
The work done so far has advanced a critical perspective on the key issues and concepts of biopolitics. The results obtained go beyond the state of art in the following respects:
1. My research has shown that technology is the critical point of reference for understanding biopolitics, sovereignty, resistance, freedom and conflict.
2. My articles have contributed to the study on Jean-Luc Nancy's philosophy, specifically to his idea of technology as an end unto itself in the recent studies of biopolitics.
3. My affirmative articulation of sovereign power with biopolitical power takes issue with the biopolitical critiques of sovereignty after Foucault.
4. The positive account of sovereignty goes beyond the immanentist conceptions of resistance that seek to undo all forms of socio-political separation.
5. I have overturned the negative preconceptions about technological domination and technological mastery in the recent reception of Martin Heidegger's work.
Additionally, I have published two popular articles in the Estonian cultural weekly “Sirp”: “Suveräänsus üleilmastumise loojakul” and “Vene-Ukraina soda ja suveräänsus.” The last article was published in the Finnish online journal Poliitikasta as “Russia-Ukraine War and Sovereignty.”
1. My research has shown that technology is the critical point of reference for understanding biopolitics, sovereignty, resistance, freedom and conflict.
2. My articles have contributed to the study on Jean-Luc Nancy's philosophy, specifically to his idea of technology as an end unto itself in the recent studies of biopolitics.
3. My affirmative articulation of sovereign power with biopolitical power takes issue with the biopolitical critiques of sovereignty after Foucault.
4. The positive account of sovereignty goes beyond the immanentist conceptions of resistance that seek to undo all forms of socio-political separation.
5. I have overturned the negative preconceptions about technological domination and technological mastery in the recent reception of Martin Heidegger's work.
Additionally, I have published two popular articles in the Estonian cultural weekly “Sirp”: “Suveräänsus üleilmastumise loojakul” and “Vene-Ukraina soda ja suveräänsus.” The last article was published in the Finnish online journal Poliitikasta as “Russia-Ukraine War and Sovereignty.”