(Rabinow, 1984, p. 11). In both the above forms,
"the person who is put into a cell or whose dossier is being compiled is basically in a passive, constrained position". (Rabinow, 1984, p. 11). Whereas in subjectification, "Foucault is primarily concerned with the techniques through which the person initiates an active selfformation. These operations entail a process of self -understanding but one which is mediated by an external authority figure." (Rabinow, 1984, p. 11). These operations might be changing of behaviour, thoughts or ideologies wherein the person is convinced about the idea of becoming 'normal ' according to how the society or the external authority figure conceives it.
Foucault points out that the "truth of archival past is a truth that survives on wings of the descriptive presentation of the facts, that is on the descriptive work permitted in a given historical time by the predominant community of discourse". (Ritzer, 2004). By this he
…show more content…
3) and without the fear of someone judging him/her.
Considering Foucaultian ideas of objectification of subject, we can see that the influence of family and society, and the beliefs regarding normal and pathological, are the major factors in the development of super-ego. This also affects the ego. The superego and ego keep developing with the varying interactions with the environment and various experiences of the being.
Freud 's view of transference, Oedipus Complex and the consideration of ego as an agency counter the his belief of impersonal, biological energy mechanisms. (Lapsley & Stey, 2011, p. 8).
Freud also describes ego as a province which takes care of maintaining the balance between the external world and the unconscious mind and thus behaving accordingly. This can be seen as a control mechanism and an indirect way of objectifying the subject. Thus, the functions or operations of an individual or society are not exactly according to the person 's will as many