Introduction: Main Currents in Biopolitics
| DOI | 10.1177/019251218700800201 |
| Published date | 01 April 1987 |
| Date | 01 April 1987 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
107
Introduction:
Main
Currents
in
Biopolitics
ALBERT
SOMIT
AND
STEVEN
A.
PETERSON
In
seeking
a
title
for
this
special
issue,
we
briefly
considered
calling
it
&dquo;Best
of
Biopolitics.&dquo;
That
alliterative
caption
had
obvious
appeal
but,
we
quickly
realized,
two
serious
shortcomings:
first,
it
was
pejorative-and
would
likely
lead
to
a
small
group
of
colleagues
unappreciative
of
the
honor
done
them
and,
even
more
surely,
a
large
number
grievously
offended
by
omission;
second,
and
more
important,
it
would
have
been
inaccurate.
To
be
sure,
quality
was
a
very
important
factor
in
the
selection
process;
at
the
same
time,
we
wanted
the
issue
to
reflect
the
various
emphases
currently
encountered
in
biopolitics.
In
some
areas,
consequently,
we
had
to
make
an
essentially
arbitrary
choice
among
several
outstanding
items.
Under
these
circumstances,
the
only
accurate
variant
of
the
title
would
have
been
&dquo;A
Representative
Selection
of
the
Best
of
Contemporary
Biopolitics,
Everything
Considered.&dquo;
While
that
title
nicely
captures
what
we
have
sought
to
accomplish
in
this
issue,
it
carries
&dquo;truth
in
packaging&dquo;
a
bit
too
far-ergo,
the
more
manageable,
if
slightly
less
precise,
&dquo;Main
Currents
in
Biopolitics.&dquo;
The
development
of
biopolitics
has
already
been
treated
at
length
in
the
literature
(Somit
et
al.,
1980;
Somit
and
Slagter,
1983).
For
those
who
are
unfamiliar
with
the
subject,
though,
a
brief
introductory
overview
may
be
useful.
Biopolitics
is
that
approach
to
political
science
whose
proponents
use
biological
concepts
and
research
techniques
to
study
and
explain
political
behavior.
Originating
in
the
middle
to
late
1960s,
biopolitics
received
formal
disciplinary
recognition
with
the
establishment,
in
1973,
of
the
International
Political
Science
Association’s
Research
Committee
on
Biology
and
Politics.
This
was
followed
by
the
organization,
in
the
United
States,
of
the
Association
for
Politics
and
the
Life
Sciences
(1980)
and
the
launching,
two
years
later,
of
its
journal,
Politics
and
the
Life
Sciences.
The
Association
now
has
approximately
300
members
and,
while
still
predominantly
American,
includes
political
and
social
scientists,
as
well
as
biologists,
from
some
15 countries.
The
literature
of
biopolitics,
originally
a
meager
handful
of
items,
now
totals
some
700
works
and
is
expanding
at
the
rate
of
about
100
articles,
books,
conference
papers,
etc.,
annually.
Publication
outlets
include
not
only
practically
every
major
American
political
science
journal
but
also
professional
journals
in
at
least
a
half-dozen
other
countries.
The
practitioners
of
biopolitics
generally
agree
on
three
propositions:
(1)
that
human
political
behavior
is
to
a
significant
degree
influenced
by
the
species’
biological
makeup
and
genetic
legacy;
(2)
that
human
social
and
political
behavior
can
be
modified
by
changes
in
biological
functioning
induced
by
illness,
stress,
drugs,
pain,
fatigue,
malnutrition,
etc.;
(3)
that
physiological
metrics
(e.g.
galvanic
skin
To continue reading
Request your trial