From this note from a clinical psychologist, the Foucault's gaze is described as:
... with this powerful gaze the physician could penetrate illusion and see through to the underlying reality, that the physician had the power to see the hidden truth.
(Source: Shawver, L. Notes on reading the Birth of the Clinic. 16 May 1998. http://www.california.com/~rathbone/foucbc.htm)
My questions are:
What is the difference between a doctor gazing at a patient, and a zoologist observing or experimenting on a bird? Are they the same except for the emphasis on the fact that the doctor necessarily has to impersonalize the patient, and the patient is defined by their illnesses?
Is the act of impersonalizing the patients the same as Buddhist detachment? The detachment "is a state in which a person overcomes his or her attachment to desire for things, people or concepts of the world and thus attains a heightened perspective." So the doctor's attachment to the patient has been overcome.
Also, if possible, can you explain how the gaze is a result of postmodernism? How is it different from simple psychology that you need to get used to it to get your job done?
Other links: The Birth of the Clinic, The Clinical Gaze