Question Description
Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? for CAT 2024 is part of CAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: The passage below is followed by some questions based on its content. Answer the questions on the basis of what is stated or implied in the passage.Before discussing the relationship, I would like to break down the concepts of bio-power and capitalism used by Foucault first. Foucault defined bio-power to be "the administration of bodies and the calculated management of life". This definition emphasized "administration" and "management". In order to clarify this distinction, Foucault contrasted bio-power against sovereign power. Sovereign power expressed itself as the absolute and final determinant to take away lives. Bio-power, on the contrary, was concerned much less about seizure and deduction.Foucault elaborated the techniques of bio-power through two concepts: anatomo-politics and bio-politics, both of which were forms of bio-power. Anatomo-politics dealt with "the body as a machine" at the level of individuals. It set a normative and desirable standard of the human body and manipulated every single segment of it to conform to its standard; by doing so, it disciplined the body. Bio-politics, on the other hand, dealt with "the species body, the body imbued with the mechanics of life and serving as the basis of the biological processes" at the level of population. It aspired to control "propagation, births and mortality, the level of health, life expectancy and longevity" so that it could regulate the population as a whole and thus manage its change in every aspect.It is worth noticing that these two basic forms of bio-power were not antithetical. Anatomo-politics normalized the specific behaviours and set of actions of each individual by implementing normative standards and manipulating body segments. Bio-politics normalized the characteristics of the population by intervening in its political and economic determinants.Foucault did not provide a clear definition of capitalism. His conception of capitalism, however, can be deduced from his explanations. First, Foucault argued that the development of capitalism required adjustment in "the machinery of production and…economic processes" as well as "a stable and competent labour force. It had private ownership and wage labour as its material makeup and economic presupposition. Furthermore, Foucalt mentioned that capitalism was a "development". Third, Foucault pointed out that there were two classes in capitalism: bourgeoisie and proletariat. The political peculiarity of capitalism lay in the antagonism between these two classes, in which the former employed and dominated the latter. Moreover, Foucault claimed that "bio-power was…an indispensable element in the development of capitalism".Capitalism and bio-power together imposed a set of social discourse that appeared as something truthful and justified both of them. Capitalism turned techniques of bio-power and its penetrating control of body into a market principle. Bio-power created a discourse in which the normal way of living, the normal condition of the human body, and the normal character of classes were defined so that the alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable. Thus, the social discourses imposed by capitalism and bio-power, which designated a normalized and seemingly truthful notion of body, interactively helped to conceal the wretched conditions and subjugation they brought.Q."... alienated bodies in capitalist production were seen not as miserable, but normal and even desirable." From this it can be inferred that the author is LEAST likely to agree with which of the following statements?a)The standards of production and processes were engrained upto the point that they did not seem unusual.b)The desirability of traits under capitalist production depended upon the needs and demands of the bourgeoisie.c)Capitalism relied on highlighting the drudgeries one has to perform to obtain explicit consent of proletariat.d)Standardization of the human traits instead of separation was the basis of generating consent under capitalism.Correct answer is option 'C'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CAT tests.