Panopticon; designed by Bentham as a model for monitoring the whole, is a modern prison system that keeps individuals under surveillance without being seen. It represents the philosophy of controlling vast masses during its time. Bentham’s Panopticon theory is extensively discussed in Foucault’s works, where Foucault explains this theory through measures taken during the plag ue outbreak in Europe. All these measures and surveillance mechanisms lead to the spread of the consciousness of being constantly observed and controlled in society, even if the act of surveillance were to cease at some point. Once individuals become accustomed to this system, they continue to live as if they are constantly being watched and controlled. This situation reveals how the form of modern power and governance spreads within the societal base and how governance policies take on new shapes.

The Panopticon is a system where the majority watches and controls the minority; Bentham explains this through the prison model, while Foucault associates this prison system with the places where the majority of society resides, such as schools, factories, and social life. In simple terms, according to Bentham, the Panopticon consists of a tower at the centre of the prison where the observer resides. Surrounding the tower are cells divided into circular segments, each containing a prisoner. Each prisoner has two windows—one facing directly into the tower, allowing the observer to watch them, and the other facing outward, preventing the prisoners from seeing the observer and only being aware of being watched. Additionally, prisoners cannot communicate with each other, and each cell houses only one prisoner. Thick walls separate them from each other, allowing the observer in the tower to monitor each prisoner individually, while the prisoners cannot communicate among themselves. The central tower can accommodate an observer, and each surrounding segment can house a prisoner, a madman, or a patient. This system is a low-cost and authoritarian control system. As the prisoners cannot see the observer after a while, they cannot break the rules imposed on them, and the fact that their cells are entirely visible from the outside acts as a trap for them. This constant sense of being monitored and the obligation to comply with the rules bring about a sense of conformity and obedience. According to Foucault, these individuals are “objects of knowledge but never subjects of communication.”

Once trapped in this vicious cycle, it becomes challenging to escape. This philosophy becomes even more alarming when combined with advanced technology, where everything is digitized in modern times. With the involvement of scientists in the judicial process and the establishment of norms defining “normal individuals,” there emerges a definition of “abnormal,” leading to the exclusion of those deemed abnormal from society. Sometimes, these individuals are considered criminals, sometimes insane, or even patients. In the Panopticon model, the prisoners’ isolation intensifies as they cannot communicate with others, making the modern judicial system a system that applies pressure not only to the body but also to the soul. This life behind closed doors is a life of loneliness, and from the perspective of the observer in the tower, it is entirely different from the perspective of a guard, as the individuals in front of them become a crowd to be controlled rather than a group of criminals or prisoners. Thus, the relationship between the criminal and the guard transforms into a relationship between the observed and the observer. Power takes on a different form, detaching itself from individuality and turning into an automatic machine that shapes compliant, well-behaved, and “normal” individuals. In this system, it does not matter who holds power or who the ruler is. The control task in the watchtower can be performed by anyone; it does not require any special skill or training. The imprisoned individual, in Foucault’s terms, must behave well, follow medical treatments if ill, or work as a labourer.

The philosophy of the Panopticon is a profound one and has been extensively discussed by numerous important philosophers and thinkers, with Foucault being one of the foremost. While some sources suggest that Bentham might have taken inspiration from Le Voux’s zoo in Versailles when creating this philosophy, Bentham himself has not provided any explanation on this matter. Nevertheless, the structure of the Panopticon involves individualization, separation of parts, characterization, and governance, making it highly functional. This system provides the ability to easily observe and experiment on individuals.

Another question raised by this system, independent of all these circumstances, is the question of “who is the prisoner.” It is not overlooked that while individuals considered to have strayed from the norms are labelled as prisoners, the observer who constantly watches them is also a prisoner in a sense or rather an integral part of this order. From all these perspectives, Panopticon embodies some of the most significant problems of our time: isolation, desensitization, and passivity/conformity. It produces a model of individuals who cannot dialogue with their surroundings, living within their inner worlds, and becoming deaf to other realms. If a prisoner were to be judged in a primitive system instead of the modern judicial system, the judge would examine whether the person committed the crime, and if convicted, they would be punished with a method that inflicts physical pain. While this may not be a method to be praised or preferred, it does not subject the individual to solitude, an endless state of loneliness, and turmoil in their soul, making it a more humane punishment compared to the modern system. Evaluating this situation from the perspective of human dignity is unfortunately quite difficult. As individuals, we are living our lives as given to us. What makes us equal is not our qualities but our humanity. We coexist with many individuals whose mental faculties are impaired in Anatolia, and here, instead of excluding them due to their differences, they should be reintegrated into society. In the Middle Ages in Europe, individuals with impaired mental faculties were seen as supernatural beings and treated as divine beings. In the modern age, the same individuals are excluded by labelling them as insane or abnormal. This situation might be the result of the corruption of the values and culture that hold a society together. When we look at Turkey today, we see that, to some extent, people in Anatolia unite instead of excluding each other, accepting a constructive approach and creating an environment of solidarity. Of course, this is not an example of cases that cause harm to oneself and society. It is for individuals who can integrate into society but are defined as outside the norm and normal.

Returning to Foucault’s theory, the changes in the judicial and prison systems are not a step taken to elevate human dignity or an outcome of Enlightenment ideas. According to Foucault, these changes show a process in which the balance of power and authority has shifted. During this process, the dominant, singular authority has lost its individuality and spread throughout society. This spread leads to individualization, separation, and isolation in society. Consequently, society becomes easier to govern, and although power and authority seem to be divided, they form a more robust structure of authority.