The Dispositive of Intercultural Communication

Introduction

French philosopher Michel Foucault (1926-1984) in his works has developed a discourse perspective on history. Instead of considering history as a linear sequence of events, Foucault argued that society and social phenomena emerge in a complex interweaving of discursive formations. From the beginning, the discursive construction of power had been a central aspect for Foucault, whereas his late works even more focus on the question of how society produces power relations and how at the same time, power shapes society. Notions like those of dispositif, (Foucault, 1977b, p. 63; cf. Engl. “apparatus”: Foucault, 1980, p. 194) gouvernementalité (Foucault, 2004b, p. 111; cf. Engl. “governmentality”: Foucault, 2007, p. 108) and bio-pouvoir (Foucault, 1976, p. 184; cf. Engl. “bio-power”: Foucault, 1978, p. 140) helped Foucault to precisely name these constellations. However, Foucault did not develop these concepts as bases for methodology-led empirical analyses. Instead, he invited his scholars to use his texts as a “tool-box” (Foucault, 1994a, p. 523) and to see his considerations as a “game” (cf. French: “un jeu”: Foucault, 1977b, p. 62) that others are invited to actively join.

This article starts with a very short introduction to Foucault’s concept of the dispositive. It will then present and discuss a selection of applied research methods relying on this concept. Since the concept of dispositives excels other tools from discourse analysis in its ability to consider a wide heterogeneity of empirical material, it is best suitable for large-scale analyses of social phenomena. Accordingly, instead of a textual analysis, this article will explore the potential of dispositive analyses for an evaluation of the general field of intercultural communication research and teaching. Instead of a fine-grain inspection, dispositive analyses may also be considered as a “reading experience” (Nowicka, 2013, pp. 37-38), and the examples given in this article cannot be more than impulses for critical reflections of the field. The article will close with some critical remarks on the methodological soundness of the approach paying particular attention to argumentative circularities of the method.