Governmentality

Governmentality is regulating and directing behavior with the aim of governing with the lowest possible cost. In efficient governmentality, subjects must relate to themselves in such a way (form their understanding and behavior) that they freely and creatively reproduce or update a certain order. Therefore, the basic question of the present article is as follows: How and in what way should efficient Islamic governmentality be established so that on the one hand, Islam and Islamic teachings play a significant role in shaping the understanding and behavior of the subjects, on the other hand, can the creativity and innovation of the subjects be used in order not to marginalize Islam in Muslim life? To answer this question, we must consider Islam as an immanent political force or political spirituality that is current in people's lives (not Islam as an epistemological system that should lead to the rule of law). Islam as an active political force in human life (as manifested in the Islamic Revolution) continuously shapes people's desire for change and resistance (as active forces that live on the limits), and turns them into efficient subjects who creatively apply Islam (as a social knowledge) in their daily lives and keep it efficient.

The identity and performance of the Justice and Development Party of Türkiye since coming to power in 2002 has been the subject of much thought and questions. By emphasizing the legacy of the last Islamic caliphate and relying on new economic-political achievements, Turkish Islamists have displayed a new formulation of state reason (raison d'état) in the international system under the banner of "Islamic Democracy". They claim to have formulated the requirements of being a Muslim requirements and the secular provisions of today's world together. This formulate of ruling which is based on a new understanding of Turkish Muslim identity contributes to the manifestation of self-confidence in domestic and foreign politics, and this is what have made them to be reckless in pursuing the policy of strategic depth in the Islamic world, the Middle East, Central Asia, North Africa and even Mediterranean area.By applying the theoretical possibilities of the concept of Governmentality in Foucault's thought, this article aims to first shed light on what and how this intellectual and identity transformation is, and then apply it to the politics of the Justice and Development Party.

The main question of the present research was theorizing controversies and their reason in educational administration studies. The search for the answer to this question was done by genealogical method. In the present thesis, an attempt was made to investigate the end and method of theorizing and its supposed reasons as the two main topics of discussion in this controversy, by Foucaultian genealogy. Following the search for the roots, this study led to the discovery of the sources of theorizing, including scientific power and governmentality, three conflicting discourses of theorizing, and two major ruptures in the theorizing process of educational administration studies. The discourses were identified and divided into three categories: “conventionalism”, “sanctification of science” and “evolution”, and the ruptures were categorized as “methodological rupture” and “teleological rupture”. According to the findings of this study, it can be concluded that educational administration studies are on the one hand considered by experts in the fields of education and social sciences, and on the other hand, are favored by politicians and rulers as a political tool for governments. Contrary to the claims of many competing theories, the emergence of theory in educational administration studies in its global origin has been a tool of political governance rather than seeking to achieve ideal goals such as awareness, welfare, educational justice, democracy, freedom and education. Following the expansion of colonial territories in the European and American governments, facing the huge population of colonized countries such as India and China and the ineffectiveness of previous models of governance, technological tools of discipline from authoritarian and force-based governance are changed to governance based on the education and training of individuals in accordance with the demands of the ruler systems. In other words, according to the conflicting discourses and double ruptures, theorizing in educational administration studies from Foucault’s point of view as a technology of discipline in the modern era, where it has followed political purposes, has had no advantage for this field of study, and every theory with a new claim has increased the ambiguity and confusion in its theoretical nature.