ABSTRACT

This discussion addresses the history of bureaucratic frank counsel in the British Civil Service, exploring the possibilities and limitations of concepts associated with the later Foucault for its analysis. Foucault makes clear in his lectures that the notion of parrhesia has a long and varied history. This discussion considers a particular trajectory of this ancient idea: the practice of frank counsel in the context of the ethics of the Civil Service in Britain, focusing on the years of Conservative government in the 1980s. We begin by clarifying the interconnection between the practice of bureaucratic frank counsel in Britain and the concept of parrhesia. We are, however, primarily concerned to examine the fate of ‘bureaucratic frank counsel’. Foucauldian scholars of governmentality have been concerned to highlight how ethical attributes of enterprise and responsiveness have displaced the customary ethics of public service. The implication is that the frank counsel of public servants has been silenced. Revisiting the era in which the advanced liberal government of the Civil Service first took shape, we question this view. We explore the emergence of the idea of formal codification as a common aspiration for the defense of customary ethical practices. We conclude by arguing that a deep ambivalence now characterizes this domain of ethical practice.

摘要

讨论讨论了英国公务员制度中官僚坦率的律师的历史，探讨了与后来的福柯有关的概念的可能性和局限性，以进行分析。福柯在他的演讲中清楚地表明，早病的概念有着悠久而多样的历史。这次讨论考虑了这一古老思想的特殊轨迹：在英国公务员道德的背景下，坦率的律师实践，重点是1980年代的保守党政府。我们首先阐明英国官僚坦率律师的做法与parrhesia概念之间的联系。但是，我们主要关心审查“官僚坦率的律师”的命运。富国政府的学者一直关注强调企业的道德属性和响应能力如何取代了公共服务的习惯伦理。这意味着公务员的坦率律师已经沉默了。回顾公务员制度先进的自由政府最初形成的时代，我们对此观点提出了质疑。我们探索形式化编纂概念的出现，将其作为捍卫习惯伦理实践的共同愿望。我们以争论的最后结论是，现在这种道德实践领域具有鲜明的矛盾性。回顾公务员制度先进的自由政府最初形成的时代，我们对此观点提出了质疑。我们探索形式化编纂概念的出现，将其作为捍卫习惯伦理实践的共同愿望。我们以争论的最后结论是，现在这种道德实践领域具有鲜明的矛盾性。回顾公务员制度先进的自由政府最初形成的时代，我们对此观点提出了质疑。我们探索形式化编纂概念的出现，将其作为捍卫习惯伦理实践的共同愿望。我们以争论的最后结论是，这种道德实践领域具有鲜明的矛盾心理。