Biopolitics, a concept introduced by the philosopher Michel Foucault, refers to the ways in which political and social systems regulate the lives of individuals, not only through direct legislation, but also through discursive and technological practices that influence health, behavior, and emotions. This phenomenon, far from being an exclusive issue of politics or public health, has expanded to other areas, including well-being, which is now profoundly influenced by modern technologies. In this article, we will look at how the biopolitics of the mind, reinforced by digital technologies, is shaping the concept of well-being, and how this process can be both liberating and oppressive. Be attentive and reflect.
Well-being and Biopolitics: Control over the Body and Mind
Well-being is a concept that refers to the state of health and balance, both biopsychosocial, and emotional. In contemporary society, however, well-being is no longer just a personal or subjective issue; it has become a device of social control, managed not only by governments, but also by corporations and technological systems, with the blessing of science. Wellness, in its most modern form, is a normative concept that dictates what is “healthy” or “desirable,” and who is entitled to access these conditions. By deciding which standards are considered factors or components of well-being, it is decided that others are not. Also when we measure well-being in which contexts and exclude the other, we are showing an inference bias that is part of the biopolitics of power.
Through public health policies, corporate strategies, and social practices, well-being has been instrumentalized as a form of biopower. It is no longer enough for individuals to simply be healthy: they must adhere to a series of standards of well-being that include physical fitness, level of productivity and emotional regulation and forms of mental health. This creates a social norm that not only seeks physical health, but also control over mental and emotional health, often influenced by the collective perception of what an “ideal body” or a “healthy mind” is.
Well-being as a Tool for Normalization
The biopolitics of well-being manifests itself in the way people are forced to meet certain predefined standards. It is not only about maintaining a healthy life, but also about “optimizing” the body and mind according to social norms. This process has been institutionalized through the media, advertising, and technology, which continually impose a model of well-being accessible only to those with the necessary resources. Wellness products and services, such as fitness apps, fad diets, and health devices, not only seek to improve health, but also to shape individuals’ practices and thoughts, adjusting them to a normative mold.
In this context, biopolitics is not limited only to physical control, but extends to the mind, behavior and emotions. People, instead of being explicitly directed by the state, are induced to follow certain expectations through social pressure and self-management. Individuals feel responsible for maintaining their well-being, and this imperative of self-management entails the internalization of welfare norms imposed by social institutions, technology companies, and science. They decide which individual has well-being and which lacks it, according to predetermined ones.
Technology and Biopolitics of the Mind: Instrumentalization of Well-Being
The biopolitics of the mind, backed by technology, has become an even more subtle form of control. Personal monitoring technologies, such as mental health apps and wearable devices that measure exercise, sleep, and other aspects of daily life, provide constant feedback on individuals’ physical and emotional state. This has led to the creation of a system of self-policing in which people not only feel responsible for their physical well-being, but also for their mental and emotional health, guided by the technological metrics that define what is “normal” or “optimal”. Moving away from LIFE, our well-being has to do with others, with a relational construct, which this model completely ignores.
These technologies, far from empowering the individual, also reinforce a form of biopolitical control. The companies and laboratories that develop these tools collect personal data, which can be used to create behavioral and emotional profiles, influencing both personal and political decisions. Technology not only regulates the body and mind, but also establishes new mechanisms of social control, where individuals feel pressured to comply with predefined standards of well-being, at the risk of being excluded from the system if they do not comply with it.
In addition, the constant feedback of data not only reinforces the power of technology, but also turns the subject’s well-being into a quantifiable goal. This process dehumanizes the individual, who ceases to be a person with particular needs and desires to become an object of constant measurement, subject to the regulations of digital well-being. The idea of well-being becomes a commodity that can be optimized and sold, where control over mental and emotional health is exercised by actors beyond the reach of individuals.
Individual Responsibility: Neoliberalism and Self-Management of Welfare
In neoliberal societies, the responsibility for welfare has been transferred from a state that cared – in a good way – for individuals. It is not enough for the state or institutions to provide the means for a healthy life; Each person is now expected to be responsible for their own well-being, from their physical health to their emotional state. This ideology of self-management, although at first seems empowering, is actually a form of biopower that places a burden on the individual to meet expectations that are not always achievable or fair.
Well-being, therefore, becomes a moral imperative and one of self-policing. People internalize wellness norms, they feel pressure to optimize their bodies and minds to meet the standards imposed by society. This not only has an impact on people’s mental health, but also fuels social inequalities. Those who do not have access to the resources necessary to meet these standards are excluded and stigmatized.
In my work I have seen it a lot, how this concept of well-being as part of a technological capitalism feeds on the same groups that generate wars. 4% of the world’s population believes they can determine what standards welfare should have, ignoring the other 96%. Is this really well-being or rather a form of biopolitical control
A Critical Reflection on the Biopolitics of Wellbeing
Biopolitics applied to well-being, especially in its digital and technological version, is radically transforming the way societies understand and manage physical and emotional health. While wellness technologies promise to empower individuals to achieve healthier lives, they are actually reinforcing mechanisms of social control that define what is “normal,” “healthy,” and “desirable.” Instead of liberating people, these technologies subject them to a system of self-surveillance that perpetuates the norms imposed by a corporate and political elite.
It is essential to take a critical look at the biopolitics of well-being, questioning who defines what is healthy and who has access to those definitions. Well-being should be seen not only as a set of diverse individual and community practices, but as a deeply social and political concept, shaped by the forces of power that regulate both the bodies and minds of individuals.
Reflect.
Study with us
