Alan Turing supposedly subscribed to the theory of mind that has been greatly inspired by the power of the said technology and which has become the dominant framework for current researches in artificial intelligence and cognitive science, namely, computationalism or the computational theory of mind. In this essay, I challenge this supposition. In particular; I will try to show that there is no evidence in Turing's two seminal works that supports such a supposition. His 1936 paper is all about the notion o/computation or computability as it applies to mathematical functions and not to the nature or workings of intelligence. While his 1950 work is about intelligence, it is particularly concerned with the problem of whether intelligence can be attributed to computing machines and not of whether computationality can be attributed to human intelligence or to intelligence in general.

This paper explores the political thought of Michel Foucault, which is anchored on his philosophy of subjectivation or the transformation of individuals into subjects. It presents his ideas of the State from the point of view of specific strategies and practices of power used in the transformation of individuals into subjects. It also presents his analysis of government as an organization that looks after the achievement of individual's goals and interests. The goal of government is not to achieve the common good but to realize the suitable end of each individual.

The theory practiced as resistance must come to grips with the state and with revolution. To evade, explain away, or assume the state is fatal. And to think of revolution only as anti-state is as dangerous. After all, the revolution's aftermath is revealed by history to be just another state. I argue that the danger posed by both state and revolution can be countered by the multiple in society that becomes contentious - or a contentious multiplicity. The multiple and the contentious are practices that pervade society. The state's objective is to control multiplicity and sublimate contentiousness. The revolutionary strategy is to sublimate multiplicity and direct contentiousness. But multiplicity is dangerous when it is independently contentious. And contentiousness indicates a dialectical process of challenging state power wherein the process itself is privileged over any synthesis. Contentious multiplicity is a practice of freedom.

This paper will show that attempts to control the body in late capitalism are replete with symbolic violence. Filipinos have not succeeded in confining the body, thereby validating Foucault's (1980) critique of the repressive hypothesis. Ordinary narratives about the body in the Philippines exist not in the context of a settled template of silenced debates and repressed desires, but in the explosion of discourse and contestations, and of an intricate articulation between popular knowledge and truth on one hand, and the ordinary and everyday experience of pleasure and desire on the other.