Assignment Name-Smriti Singh Roll No: 4593: Understanding Modernity'

ASSIGNMENT
Name- Smriti Singh

Roll no: 4593
UNDERSTANDING ‘MODERNITY’: -
The terms ‘tradition’ and ‘modernity’ do not exist in isolation of each other but are in fact
related to each other. While these terms concepts and processes exist, they exist and
function dialogically. Thus, modernity is an economic force while tradition is fundamentally
cultural and social and tradition is basically a series of attitudes, languages, music, art,
scholarship and so on which have been developing since ages past. Tradition is, therefore, a
repository of survival mechanisms without which a society would fail to cohere. It would set
fragmented and break up, the result of which would be anomic. It has a tendency to become
entropic and inward looking. This is true of many local level traditions and sub traditions are
stamped out and disappear without leaving much of a trace.
On the other hand, modernity indicates a type of society that is more developed relative to
other societies. So, a society characterised by modernity is described as a modern society.
The social structure of modernity is such that it defines the transition from isolated
communities to mass scale society. Thus, modernity is found not just in the West. This
process can be seen as working all over the world rather than just in the advanced nations.
Thus, mass society point toward large scale movement of goods, people, information among
separate areas and standardisation of many aspects of society which are helpful for mobility
increased specialisation and interdependence of different parts of the society.
When the elements or products of modernity “invade” another culture through popular
processes such as various cultural aspects such as folktales and cinema there is a
widespread ‘overhaul’ of cultural and social ontology and these tend to change a society and
prepare it for further changes. This results in a homogenisation of culture and creates
widespread diversification at the local level. There are other features, such as democratic
government and the hierarchical structures within it. Even the private sector grew greatly in
influence. This sometimes creates a friction and modernity can be perceived as being
totalitarian. However, the individual in modernity belongs to those subsystems, and is part of
the competition, liberty, and individualism. This is all the truer for comparisons of modernity
with societies that are traditional.
Modernity brought with it many blessings to the people including much better health and
economic prospects. However, there are also some problems which have emerged with
modern society e.g., the nuclear bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki during world war II;
and the arms race thereafter. Other problems include environmental degradation e.g., air
and water pollution.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENLIGHTENMENT AND MODERNITY: -

The Enlightenment is one of the most important and contested periods in the history of
philosophy. The problems it addressed, such as the proper extent of individual freedom and
the challenging of tradition, resonate as much today as when they were first debated. The
fiery one question of “What is Enlightenment?” posed by Johann Friedrich Zollner in
December 1783 in the Berlinische Monatsschrift, Immanuel Kant was one of the
respondents for the question. In his pursuit to guard enlightenment, he cut across various
themes of the then times- religion, sciences and liberal politics as consisting in the effort of
each individual to think for her or himself.
A two hundred years later, Michel Foucault attempts to describe a ‘philosophical ethos which
is characterized as an attitude of permanent critique’. Foucault locates the relationship
between enlightenment and modernity at ‘the crossroads of critical reflection and reflection
on history’. The Enlightenment is the ‘age of critique’ which is also a striking feature of
modernity. The relation therefore, is not epochal but of a synthesis of freedom and reason
which characterises the attitude of critique and self-introspection.
‘18th CENTURY ANSWERS AND 20th CENTURY QUESTIONS’: -

The eighteenth century was at the threshold of an intellectual movement which inspired and
produced several thinkers who dared to understand their reality. Kant was one such thinker
who promoted enlightenment as an ‘exit from man’s self-incurred immaturity’. Immaturity
here is not only the lack of understanding but lack of resolution and courage to use it without
the guidance of another.
Laziness and cowardice are hindrances to the use of one’s own reason. It is only through the
use of reason that individual can escape the ‘self-incurred immaturity’. Kant is interested in
public enlightenment rather than individual enlightenment. It is a gradual process and
enlightenment of this kind requires freedom, freedom to make public use of one's reason in
all matters. To balance the demands of enlightened reason and civil order he distinguishes
between "public" and "private" uses of reason. By "public" use, Kant meant that "use which
anyone makes of it as a scholar before the entire public of the reading world." It is contrasted
to that "private" use which individuals make of their reason in those specific civil posts or
offices that have been entrusted to them. In one's private use of reason, one behaves
"passively" bound by an "artificial unanimity" to advance or to defend certain "public ends."
Kant was uncompromising in his insistence that the public exercise of reason should never
be restricted. The spirit of courage and reason is reflective.
WHAT MAKES KANT’S ESSAY PECULIAR?

Firstly, it is the fact that it identifies enlightenment with a kind of act, rather than a kind of
theory. (a way out of self-imposed immaturity).
Secondly, it is the individual her/himself who is responsible for her/his enlightenment (‘think
for yourself’). This radical individualism is also the feature of modernity.
Another important point to be highlighted is the link of reason with will and authority.
Modernity as Foucault would suggest should prompt a ‘way of thinking’ which will attend to
the call of reason. For Kant this public use of reason will result in a gradual enlightenment of
the public in general. Therefore, to look at modernity as a way of thinking, an attitude serves
better linkages with enlightenment ‘as the moment when humanity is going to put its own
reason to use, without subjecting itself to any authority’ and as Foucault stated that modern
philosophy can be understood as the philosophy that seeks to answer the same question
that Kant attempted to answer.
The debates in the eighteenth century have remained ‘sufficiently unanswered’ and the
‘modern tradition’ of criticism is impregnated in the twentieth century questions on the legacy
of enlightenment.
COMMONALITIES OF ENLIGHTENMENT AND MODERNITY: -
PROCESS: The relationship between enlightenment and modernity is essential to

understand the present as a product of reflections on history. Foucault poses a question in
this regard ‘is the entire human race caught up in the process of enlightenment?’ In that
case, Enlightenment should be imagined as a historical change that affects the political and
social existence of all people on the face of the earth. Kant sees enlightenment as a gradual
journey, an ongoing process in which the individual is responsible for breaking out of the
yoke of immaturity. The process is onerous and often portrayed by the ‘guardians’ as
dangerous. Only a few, says Kant ‘will by cultivating their own minds, have succeeded in
freeing themselves from immaturity and in continuing boldly on their way.’ He also sees a
greater possibility of public enlightenment, possible only through the free use of reason.
Enlightenment as rightly pointed out by Kant has a Wahlspruch, a heraldic device. Thus,
Enlightenment must be considered as a gradual process. It is not only a process but also an
act of progress.
PROGRESS: Kant believes that individuals in the process of enlightenment undergo
qualitative changes that positively construct her/his life. Human dignity is a running theme in
Kant. Freedom to think and reason is an essential condition for enlightenment eventually
which will make people more capable of acting freely. The cornerstone of enlightenment is
that individual is able to act independently, think for her/himself without the guidance of
another. This is a quality found in the attitude of modernity as well, as Baudelaire
characterises modernity as ‘a form of relationship with oneself’. The modern man for
Baudelaire, is the man who tries to invent himself. This modernity does not ‘liberate man in
his own being’: it compels him to face the task of producing himself. Thus, enlightenment is
the use of reason for the sake using it- rasonieren. Self-introspection is a vital aspect of
modernity. ‘We must try to proceed with the analysis of ourselves as beings who are
historically determined, to an extent, by the Enlightenment.
PRESENT: Kant’s understanding of present is unique and Enlightenment then is seen not as
a period in history or an accomplishment rather as a ‘way out’. He deals with contemporary
reality alone and attempts to answer ‘What difference does today introduce with respect to
yesterday?’ And as Baudelaire characterises modernity as the attitude that makes it possible
to grasp the ‘heroic’ aspect of the present moment, ‘it is the will to ‘heroize’ the present’.
Modernity has a close relationship to the present. It is clear that high valuability of present is
indissociable from desperate eagerness to grasp it, transform it through acts of progress and
this process will gradually result in ‘man's emergence from his self−incurred immaturity’.
Thus, all three features are interconnected.
CONCLUDING REMAKES: -
Enlightenment has stirred controversies and piqued the interest of several thinkers over the
past two centuries. To define enlightenment as an activity and a journey and modernity as
an attitude of critique celebrates reason and courage. The fine link between enlightenment
and modernity, according to the writer is ‘Sapere Aude’ (Dare to know, have courage to use
your own understanding!).
The motto of enlightenment is relevant even today- the quest to constitute oneself as an
autonomous subject. Firstly, Kant implicitly proposes “the contract of rational despotism with
free reason.” (Argue as much as you like and about whatever you like, but obey!) He makes
it clear that one cannot achieve enlightenment without following the laws of the society. This
implies that Kantian free thinking is restricted to areas where obedience isn’t required. Kant’s
context is certainly different from the current context of liberal democratic state where
freedom is understood as a natural right.
Secondly, at present with rise of surveillance state, the influence of the state has increased
considerably which has affected the relationship between state and its population. Foucault’s
panopticism concerns the systematic ordering and controlling of human populations through
subtle and often unseen forces. Such ordering is apparent in many parts of the modernized
and now, increasingly digitized, world of information.
Thirdly, Foucault’s idea of governmentality can be understood as ‘willing participation of the
governed’. The government shapes, guides and affects the conduct of its citizens.
Enlightenment for Kant is a nexus between will, authority, freedom and reason. It is evident
that under the influence of disciplinary power of the ‘modern authority’ it is a tough challenge
for individuals to enjoy freedom of thought and expression and escape immaturity- the
political problem thereby undermining the practicability of Kantian enlightenment.
Nevertheless, Kant’s answer provokes both defenders as well as critics.
The beauty of Kant and Foucault’s writings lies in the synthesis of reason with courage
which Foucault calls attitude of modernity. While there are three evident characteristics of
attitude of modernity- Heroization of the present, Transfiguration and Ascetic elaboration of
the self. The underpinning of these characteristics is the interaction between freedom and
reason. The relationship between enlightenment and modernity is not of a timeline rather of
an attitude of criticism. Kant connected the popular movement and the deeper philosophical
physical tethered which has helped us to understand modernity- The ability to practise the
motto of enlightenment ‘Sapere Aude’!

Assignment Name-Smriti Singh Roll No: 4593: Understanding Modernity'

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assignment Name-Smriti Singh Roll No: 4593: Understanding Modernity'

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Assignment Name-Smriti Singh Roll No: 4593: Understanding Modernity'

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ASSIGNMENT

Name- Smriti Singh

THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENLIGHTENMENT AND MODERNITY: -

‘18th CENTURY ANSWERS AND 20th CENTURY QUESTIONS’: -

WHAT MAKES KANT’S ESSAY PECULIAR?

COMMONALITIES OF ENLIGHTENMENT AND MODERNITY: -

PROCESS: The relationship between enlightenment and modernity is essential to

You might also like