Modernity

Research record

Modernism is not just a term for time. Science, industry, capitalism, nation-state, individualism, bureaucracy, democracy, mass education, colonialism, markets, printing, urbanization, and new communication systems are its different historical dimensions. It is difficult to make modernity the same source or the same value story. Modern institutions have brought unprecedented expansion of legal status of individuals, education, communication, medicine, democratic participation and scientific knowledge. At the same time, censuses and records, frontiers, prisons, military bureaucracies, industrial discipline and surveillance, and new forms of colonial administration were created. Therefore, modernity is neither pure liberation nor pure oppression. It is a mistake to think of tradition as a static past. Traditions themselves keep changing, reinterpreting and inventing. Modernity is also not the same thing. The person can perform family rituals using a scientific hospital. can save the regional language while asking for democratic rights. Real life is a mix of things. In South Asia, modern administration, railways, printing, modern education, new laws, and science came about as a result of the structures of colonial domination. For this reason, dualism is essential in the evaluation of modern institutions: what knowledge is universally useful Which system was created by imperialist interests? What institutions can reinvent postcolonial societies? Modernity emphasizes the autonomy of the individual; however, markets can also limit individuals as consumers and workers. Communities can be oppressive, but community-splitting can lead to isolation and insecurity. Parallel philosophies assume the need for both independent individuals and supportive communities. The modern experience of the interaction between regional languages, migration, education, digital media, employment and state policies shows that modernity does not arrive in one form or another from the center to the margins. Linguistic communities can revive traditions by using modern technology. Therefore, the distinction between local = past and global = modern does not hold. Printing, assemblies, journals, and modern communication give private individuals a platform to argue public questions. But access may be limited by education, language, property, and gender; so-called public opinion may in fact be the opinion of a narrow group. Digital mediums reduce entry costs while platform-ownership and mindfulness-trading create new gatekeepers. Publicity by itself is not free. An inclusive region requires local languages, safe dissent, source-transparency and diverse institutional platforms. Stay away from excessive control of both the state and the market. Ethical individualism assumes equal rights for every human being; selfish individualism may deny social responsibility. To call the two the same is to criticize authority. Traditional communities may support individuals but impose natal roles. Modern rights will allow an exit, but may extend to the market-exit. The parallel view seeks a relationship with rights. Individuals may choose to criticize and leave the community.The community shares the burden of care fairly. In times of modern change, communities may present certain practices as ancient unbroken traditions, even if they are new in their current form. This may not always be the case; it may be a social process of identity fixation. Historians examine the origins, changes, and choices made. By calling it an invented text, the present meaning of the practice is not nullified but the claim to antiquity is limited. The New Testament is not without its moral trials. It remains to be seen on whose exclusion the unity of the community was formed. The history of modern science, nation-states, capitalism, and bureaucracy are deeply intertwined with European expansionism; therefore, accepting modernity is called cultural subordination. But the institution changes with local struggles when it is moved. Democracy or the scientific method is not the private property of any civilization; their justification must be checked by public cause and effect.

Structured debate

Pūrvapakṣa

Modernity breaks traditional bonds and frees man; therefore, their critique is reactionary.

Uttarapakṣa

The achievement of modern freedoms is important, but the power structure of modern institutions is not immune to criticism. Parallel philosophies choose between the knowledge of tradition without the injustice of tradition or the freedom of modernity without the dehumanization of modernity.

Parallel conclusion

Modernity is an incomplete project, a struggling history and a plural experience. Their critique is not a condemnation of modern achievements but a moral examination of their emancipatory claims.

Section index

1. 58.1 The Duality of Liberation and Control
2. 58.2 Tradition vs. Modernity
3. 58.3 Colonial Modernity
4. 58.4 Individuals and communities and markets
5. 58.5 Mithila region and modernity.
6. 58.11 Creation of the public sector
7. 58.12 The Two Forms of Individualism
8. 58.13 The Invention and Reconstruction of Tradition
9. 58.14 Preface: Modernity is Westernization only
10. 58.6 Rationalization and the Bureaucracy
11. 58.7 Markets and areas of life
12. 58.8 Colonial Enlightenment - Classification
13. 58.9 Time: Speed and displacement
14. 58.10 Multi-modernity

Cite this record

Gajendra Thakur. “Modernity.” Videha Digital Research Archive: Mithila–Vajji–Anga. Videha — https://www.videha.co.in/ · ISSN 2229-547X · GitHub mirror: https://videha-ejournal.github.io/videha/ · Digital Research Archives on GitHub: https://github.com/videha-ejournal. https://videha-ejournal.github.io/mithila-vajji-anga/records/idea/philosophy-58/