The Evolution of Modernity: A Discursive Exploration
Modernity symbolizes a continual pursuit by intellectuals to reshape human history for the better, breaking free from old constraints to enhance the human condition. Rooted in the European Enlightenment of the 18th century, it embodies the freedom to reason publicly, leading to new philosophical ideologies. Associated with religious wars, social revolutions, and the birth of equality, modernity reflects a multifaceted transformation touching various aspects of society. Stuart Hall's analysis emphasizes the diverse impacts of paradigmatic changes on social, political, economic, and cultural realms.
Download Presentation
Please find below an Image/Link to download the presentation.
The content on the website is provided AS IS for your information and personal use only. It may not be sold, licensed, or shared on other websites without obtaining consent from the author. Download presentation by click this link. If you encounter any issues during the download, it is possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.
E N D
Presentation Transcript
Meaning Modernity signifies ceaseless efforts on the part of philosophers, scientists, historians and other analytical minds to chart a new course of human history better than what existed before. The journey follows a diverse trajectory encompassing all sorts of complexities and impediments in the way of the emergence of modernity but all aiming at ameliorating the human condition. It frees thinking from age-old constraints. Modernity epitomises freedom that enables the free flow of ideas primarily based on reason. In the words of Kant it is man s emergence from his self-imposed immaturity. Immaturity is the inability to use one s understanding without guidance from another .
Nature and Origin Modernity is considered to be an offshoot of European enlightenment of the 18thcentury. Kant defines it as the freedom to make public use of one s reason with the goal of liberating mankind from its self-imposed immaturity. It simply implies that both physical and moral worlds can be comprehended with the application of reason which is what he meant by public use of one s reason. Modernity driven in the spirit of enlightenment gave rise to a new philosophy centering around self and society- creation of a new mentality. Some have traced it back to the age of exploration and the discovery of the new world, beginning in the 15thcentury, others to the scientific revolution of Harvey, Galileo, and Newton, and still others to the philosophical innovations of Descartes, Hobbes, and Spinoza with their quest for new rational foundations for knowledge.
Nature and Origin (Contd.) Modernity has also been associated with the devastating wars of religion that wrecked Europe through out the 16thcentury and brought about the beginnings of our modern theories of secularism and toleration. Modernity has been identified with the social and political revolutions of 1688, 1776 and 1789 that for the first time introduced the language of equality and the rights of man.
The Discursive Quest of the Concept It underlines a long and sustained process of the formation of modernity. It would indeed be na ve to privilege one singular factor for its formation from among many criss-crossing and overlapping factors. Hence, it is important to consider all these factors together in order to weave a coherent and comprehensive meaning of modernity. It is normal that paradigmatic change invariably impacts upon different aspects of social, political, economic and cultural life of a society passing through such far-reaching changes. Capturing these changes in a systematic manner, Stuart Hall has identified the nature, range and scope of the change in the following ways:
Nature, Range and Scope of the Change A) The Dominance of secular forms of political power and authority and conceptions of sovereignty and legitimacy, operating within defined territorial boundaries, which are characteristics of the large, complex structures of the modern nation-state. B) A monetarised exchange economy, based on the large- scale production and consumption of commodities for the market, extensive ownership of private property and the accumulation of capital on a systematic and long-term basis. C) The decline of the traditional social order with its fixed social hierarchies and overlapping allegiances and the appearance of a dynamic social and sexual division of labour. In modern capitalist societies this was characterized by new class formations and distinctive patriarchal relations between men and women.
Nature, Range and Scope (Contd.) D) The decline of the religious world view typical of traditional societies and the rise of a secular and materialist culture, exhibiting those individualistic, rationalist and instrumental impulses now so familiar to us. In addition to these four two additional cultural factors also accounted for the formation of modern European societies: i. First, the emergence of modern knowledge through the processes set in motion from the Renaissance, the scientific revolution of the 17thcentury to the enlightenment of the 18th century that gave birth to a new intellectual and cognitive world in Europe. The impact of this was evident in the emergence of early capitalism and nation-state. ii. Secondly, the religious social marker of traditional society- Christian and Catholic-was gradually replaced by a strong sense of community built around the construction of the European community.
Teleological Conception of Modernity Rejected The interplay of the factors mentioned above and the changes introduced by them in the form of modernity did not follow a unilinear historical path. It defies the pattern of homogeneous historical time of its development. In contrast, a unified notion of modernity based on a single historical time scale is being presented by those who believe in the inevitability of the European kind of modernity. According to them history follows a set pattern to achieve a preordained goal of emergence of a particular modern society. But now this teleological view of history is rejected as it fails to capture the complexities of the formation of modern societies. Such a kind of fallacious argument was promoted in the 1950s in the form of the modernization theory- e.g. Rostow model (Walter Rostow).
Eurocentric Narrative of Modernity Under the modernization theory the basic assumptions that were suggested for the development of newly independent countries of the third world, were to emulate the path of western industrialization and its concomitant social values. Later this hegemonic notion of modernity was utterly disowned and rejected by the developing countries as a Eurocentric narrative of modernity. Even a cursory glance at the diverse processes of industrialization in Europe would explain the inadequacy of the mono-causal explanation of the formation of modern societies. It is not difficult to discern the different patterns of industrialization in England, France, Russia and Germany.
Patterns of Industrialization and Political Systems While in the case of England and France consumer industries inaugurated the gradual process of industrialization, in case of Russia and Germany heavy industries occupied faster investment, urgency and pace. The different trajectories of industrialization could be related to the emergence of democratic political regimes in England and France and non- democratic ones in Russia and Germany. A long, sustained and gradual process of development laid the foundation of a democratic political system, while the hurried processes in Germany and Russia did not augur well for democratic development.
Development Democracy in the Western and Indian Societies According to Prof Sudipto Kaviraj, in the West three major historical processes were substantially complete before transformation towards modern democracy began. The capitalist disciplining of workforce through brutal production regimes, the establishment of a secular state to avoid endless civil wars between religious groups vying for political control of the state and the birth of a modern civil society of individuation- all preceded the start of the democratic process. But the advent of democracy in India largely preceded the plank of development as well as the advent of modern civil society and a distinct sense of individuality. Such contextual differences explain the varied nature of democratic politics in India and the West and also the endurance of democracy in India despite apparent challenges and unsuitable conditions.
