Sociological Understanding of Modernity - Essay Example

?Understanding Society Module Module ID: Introduction: By looking into the history of the world at large, it becomes crystal clear that change has always brought comforts, luxuries, joys and delight in human life; it is therefore change has vehemently been welcomed, admired and appreciated by the imperative majority of every society since the creation of first human society on the very face of the earth. Nevertheless, history is replete with the examples of the division of all societies into three groups or categories at the eve of the advent of social change. First category consists of a very small proportion of the individuals, who strive diligently and work very hard to cause the change within their social structure. The second category carries the large proportion of the population, which welcomes the alterations taking place in their natural and physical environment, and subsequently adapt themselves according to the modifications all around them. The third and the last category consists of the fanatics, traditionalists and religious minded dogmatists, who refuse to accept change, and try to stick to the traditional and conventional ways at any cost. Somehow, they fail to resist the charms social change offers to humanity in the form of the discoveries of new lands and regions, invention of latest devices, techniques and equipments and articulation of wonderful theories, ideas and researches at large. Philosophers, thinkers, theorists, writers, scientists and researchers fall in the first category above-mentioned; Marx, Weber and Durkheim also belong to the first category, which not only welcomed the social change taking place in their environment, but also presented their theoretical frameworks by elucidating the positive and negative aspects of the change in their contemporary societies. Although they do not appear to be agreeing or disagreeing with the theoretical frameworks of one another, yet the theories presented by them maintain both similarities and dissimilarities in their nature and scope, which have been discussed as following: 1. Sociological Understanding of Modernity: Distinguished 19th century German philosopher Karl Marx has arguably supported the traditionalism through his works and writings. He asserts the very notion that the traditional ways of agricultural societies had been favourable for the workers and peasants alike because of the simplicity of the means and ways of production. People used to lead simple and contented life, and class discrimination did not prevail in such a manner as it had become in Marx’s contemporary society. Marxism associates modernity with rapid flow of industries, mills and factories, resulting in the devaluation of the workers and downfall of their prestige and respect subsequently. Karl Marx is of the opinion that industrialisation has brought several socioeconomic problems in its wake, which have caused the uneven division of the members of one and the same social structure into upper and lower classes on the foundations of their wealth and resources. Although human societies have always been divided into different classes, yet the fast growing industrial system is depriving the lower classes of their just and fair share against the services they render to their work place. Since the owners of the industries, mills and factories have taken the control of all resources, the workers are deprived of their share in the profit generated by these industrial units. He asserts the division of labour as erected on the foundations of inequality and injustice in an industrialist society, as all strata, in his views, should have equal rights on the resources of their work place, and thus should be granted the amount on the basis of the services they are rendering for the growth and development of the organisation. Modernity in the form of industrialisation, according to Marx, deteriorates a social structure, while change, in the form of a socialist revolution, paves the way towards the betterment of society, where conflict between haves and haves-not would decide and determine revised rights and obligations attributed to different social classes. While elaborating modernity in his theory of rationalisation, early twentieth century German sociologist-theorist Max Weber views that modernity carries certain distinguishing traits that are actually the outcome of various actions performed by the individuals. Hence, modernity is penetrated by certain values and their consequences for action, according to Weber. The theorist has interlinked social change with religious belief system as well as his doctrine of authority. He is of the argument that religion also plays an important role in bringing social change. He declares the oriental faiths, including Buddhism, Hinduism and Taoism as inactive beliefs that lay stress upon traditionalism and inaction in the light of the teachings including obtaining spiritual uplift, reclosing from the outer world and remaining contended on what they have been gifted with. On the other hand, the occidental religion, particularly Christianity, maintains strong belief in atonement from the Lord on having belief in some particular teachings. Such kind of strong belief urges them to get involved into action and performing different tasks that are highly supportive ones in respect of fastening the pace of change through social, cultural and economic activities of different types. On the other hand, the oriental faiths do not encourage any change and modernity, as change would put their belief in grave jeopardy. Additionally, Weber has also articulated his idea of leadership that also observes proximity with modernity. He is of the view that the authorities can be examined by dividing them into three types, which include traditional, bureaucratic and charismatic. Traditional authority seeks its roots in the tribes and clan systems, where the people consider their leaders as appointed from Almighty Lord, and hence, the masses are bound to obey them at any cost. Since the people under such authority structure carry on complying with all commands issued by the authority, there appear to be almost no chances of change or modernity in such type of system. The bureaucratic authority resembles with oligarchy, where few persons decide about the fate of the entire social establishment. The authority devises laws and implements it on the masses, and the people carry on leading their life under this authoritative rule. Since bureaucratic system does not have great concern regarding the fate of the people, they do not introduce the reforms that could lead the subjects towards modernity. While discussing third type of authority, Weber views it as rationale and charismatic, which works for bringing alterations in the lot of people by introducing the reforms in society. The intention and planning to bring reforms encourages the people to get involved into creative and innovative performances, which give birth to the idea of modernity and change eventually. Weber’s contemporary remarkable French theorist Emile Durkheim has reiterated on moral order, integrity, solidarity and regulation in everyday activities observed by the people for the collective uplift of their society. Deeply impressed and influenced by the great revolution took place in his country, he lays stress upon division of labour on the basis of the skills, proficiency and talent of the people of a social establishment. Unlike Marx and Weber, Emile Durkheim is interested in explaining the process by which individuals socially integrate into society. He takes society as one single entity that could make advancements through collective efforts. It is therefore he looks for inclusion of every person in the activities related to social construction, so that fast development of society could be possible. Hence, he encourages the participation of men and women in professional activities, for which both the genders should seek proper education and learning in order to combat with the challenges of always changing life. For this purpose, the individual behaviour of every citizen should be taken into account, so that all people could be urged to exercise their talents and abilities for building a peaceful and prosperous society. He cites the example of France before the advent of the French Revolution, where only one stratum i.e. the privileged class, consists of the royalty, clergy and nobility, had captured the resources of the entire nation, and hence enjoyed all the benefits solely. It is therefore it is frequently stated that ninety nine percent of the French died of starvation, while one percent used to expire due to indigestion. Since the royalty had not included the working classes in nation building programmes and activities, France could not make much progress in comparison with its neighbouring countries. As a result, the people stood against the stratum occupying their wealth and resources, and snatched their share from them. 2. The Development of Modern Society: Karl Marx has associated social conflict prevailing in every society with the imminent social change. Social change, according to him, always takes place in the aftermath of conflict between the privileged and deprived strata of society. Though every society has been divided into groups and communities on the concrete foundations of caste, clan, tribe, ethnicity, race, region, religion, gender and socioeconomic status for centuries, yet rapid flow of industrialisation in the wake of Industrial Revolution 1750 has perturbed the situation to a great extent by widening the gulf between haves and haves-not. Financial position of the individuals, according to the Marxist perspective, plays the most dominant role in the division of people in groups. Industrialisation has crushed and suppressed the workers, labourers and peasants by putting them at work from dawn to dusk against very low and humiliating wages and compensations. In other words, they consume their prime time, best of the energies and talent as well for the progress and growth of their work place; however, they do not obtain anything out of the profit generated because of their hard toil and since efforts. On the contrary, the producer i.e. the owner of the industrial unit or mill obtains the lion’s share on the basis of making investment of money for the running of the unit. Hence, the workers are deprived of any respectable remuneration, which results into the creation of the feelings of alienation from their work place on the one hand, and against the producer on the other. The producers and their families lead a comfortable, lavish and luxurious life even spending very short time at the industrial unit; while the workers are unable to make both ends meet, and have to borrow heavy loans from the owner to keep the wolf from the door. As a result, time comes, when the working class or proletariat raises revolt against the inequalities and injustices being committed by the producer or bourgeoisie. As a result, the working class overcomes in the aftermath of bloody clashes between the rival strata, which paves the way towards the establishment of the authority of the workers i.e. the socialist government. Such a struggle modernises the patterns of earning by offering all social strata equal opportunities of growth and development. The socialist regime, according to the Marxist perspective, establishes the rule of law on the noble principles of justice, freedom, equality and fair play, where every individual obtains his share on the basis of the performance he has made for the progress of the industrial unit. Hence, the society under socialist regime turns out to be prosperous, developed and well-to-do by demolishing status-quo and exploitation of the poor at the hands of the rich. Max Weber has also elaborated the factors and circumstances that lead the nations towards modernity and change. His theoretical framework revolves around his social action doctrine as well as bureaucracy, where he declares leadership as the source of motivation towards change and modernisation. He has divided the leadership into three categories, which include traditional, rational and charismatic. Traditional authority, as its title suggests, carries the strong observing of conventional and conservative leadership style, where the authority runs the administrative affairs in the lines of the prevailing norms, values, mores, taboos and laws, and seeks the obedience from the sub-ordinates or subjects in the light of the rule have been existing in society for the last several decades. Hence, not only this that such type of leadership is reluctant to bring any change or improvement within the social establishment, but also creates impediments on the way to invite reforms or betterment in society. Thus, such authoritarian system keeps the masses backward, underdeveloped and ignorant ones in comparison with other cultures of the world. On the other hand, rational leadership acknowledges the phenomenon of socio-cultural alterations taking place, and hence it not only accepts the change, but also motivates the masses to adapt themselves in the same lines the transformations in natural, social and physical atmosphere are being made. Moreover, authoritative posts and positions are ideally filled through strict merit policy because of their personal achievements and accomplishments instead of patronising and promoting favouritism and nepotism through the misuse of authority. In the same way, charismatic leadership not only maintains the knowledge about the changing scenario, but also creates such circumstances that could accelerate the pace of modernity and change. Consequently, the charismatic leadership urges the people to give up the outdated and old-fashioned techniques in personal and occupational activities, and adopt the latest ways in the form of communication, agricultural, industrial and technological equipments and machinery in order to compete with the rest of the world in the cultural, financial, social and professional fields of interest. Consequently, like Marxism, Weber also encourages social change and modernity, though he does not assert it as the outcome of any conflict of ideas and interest existing in social structure. Emile Durkheim has also argued in support of social change evident in every social structure in one way or the other. Contrary to Marx and Weber, Durkheim declares integration and differentiation of cultural traits and characteristics as the instigator of change in society. Durkheim argues that a time comes in the life of the nations when they start looking at traditional way of life with great suspicion. They not only begin giving up the norms, customs and conventions had been in vogue for the olden past, but also revolt against the religious cult and belief system by declaring them as impediments on their movement towards modernity. He is of the opinion that societies maintain their integration and coherence in modernity, which is replaced with age-old traditions because of the inclusion of latest technological advancements and thoughtfulness in the wake of the change in the needs and requirements of the people. Modernity becomes essential for them because of the very reality it appears to be fulfilling their needs and desires, while religious values are causing the division of the nation in the name of faith, and hence are putting their unity and coherence into grave jeopardy. Durkheim submits to state that human societies undergo various cycles during the course of time, and population growth, relationships with the neighbouring states, rivalries among the nations and conflict of interests give birth to the idea of change, which gradually makes it sure headway silently but constantly and unconsciously. Although a large majority of the masses is willingly accepting these changes, they have no perception about the fast pace of the alterations penetrating into their culture in quite insentience way. Thus, he presents the same notion articulated by Karl Marx, where the latter believed that social change is essential for the creation of a strong and superior social establishment as well as for obtaining equality and integrity. However, Marx’s major concern of social change was economic change, though indirectly Weber and Durkheim also allude to the same notion that social change gives birth to economic stability and financial uplift of the individuals at large. 3. Modernity and Post-Modernity: First coined and used by the French poet Charles Baudelaire by the mid of nineteenth century, the term modernity simply refers to the inclusion, insertion and addition of new, novel and innovative ideas, thoughtfulness, techniques, traits, style, mannerism, customs and conventions in everyday activities of human life related to their personal, domestic and professional life at large. It also includes the introduction of new political policies, social norms, cultural values and economic strategies to be adopted, imitated and practiced by an overwhelming majority of the people belonging to some specific socio-cultural establishment. In other words, modernity concentrates upon collective surrendering of the old, outdated, primitive and traditional lifestyle for the sake of espousing the latest fashions, modes, manners and outlook with the intention of bringing positive and constructive alterations in life. Consequently, modernity serves as revolt against the traditionalism and conventionalism and the norms, values and fashions affiliated with the primitive and previous societies. The notion is not confined to one single field; rather, it captures art and literature, music and sculpture, sports and games, music and poetry, festivals and attire, politics and economy, trade and commerce, domestic responsibilities and professional activities, science and technology, communication and navigation and much more. The term modernity actually came into existence in order to express and explain the advent of industrial revolution of 1750, which served as a significant blow to agrarianism and old ways of production techniques and methodology. Before the advent of industrial revolution, the entire populations living in all regions of the globe used to affiliate with agriculture directly or indirectly. A significant proportion of the population of European countries consisted of peasantry, where both men and women used to work into fields by ploughing the fields, implanting seeds, growing crops and harvesting them subsequently. The people other than peasantry had adopted the profession similar or relevant to agriculture, which include collecting, carrying and grinding of crops; trade was also concentrated on agricultural material, and people were associated with the sale and purchase of the commodities, food, vegetable, fruits, grains and others. Some of the individuals also owned cattle in order to sell milk and meat on the one hand, and for communication and travelling purposes on the other. Handicraft and manual skills were applied to produce the garments, shoes and other items of every day use. Post-modernity, on the other hand, refers to the era of technological revolution, which came in the wake of modern times. Actually the terms modern and post-modern are not only sociological, but also depict the literary eras too. The critics have divided the literary times into ancient, primitive, medieval, Elizabethan, classical, reformative, romantic, Victorian, modern and most-modern ones. In the same way, lifestyle and scientific developments also reflect the same division in their fold. Post-modern life has witnessed marvellous, stunning and incredible transformations in all walks of life. The industrialisation has been replaced with the astounding technological inventions, where latest technologies are being applied in industrial, agricultural, professional and recreational sectors; as a result, communications and travelling have witnessed unbelievable boost and progress. Advent of computer technology, microbiology, the internet and artificial meteors have conquered the mountains and deserts, and mysteries of marine and space for humans. Post-modern era is actually the age of information technology, where flow of knowledge and information is possible within a jiffy to the distant lands. Now, the nations are exploring all that is under the surface of the earth as well as above the blue skies with the help of technological advancements. Art and literature have got exemplary growth, and one can hear the news about the events taking place in pole-apart regions of the globe. Modernity and post-modernity had also brought rationality, consciousness and wisdom in their wake. The philosophy and scientific researches witnessed revolutionary modifications in modern era. The people got the comforts their predecessor societies were not familiar with. Art and literature also flourished with the invention of paper industries and publication machinery. However, life started becoming complex with the passage of time. Actually, human life was simple, and work hours used to be short in post modern societies. There were not complexities in respect of class conflict and discrimination. All the resources were considered to be the government property, where the state was responsible for the distribution of wealth and opportunities to the masses. Although people owned houses, properties, businesses and agricultural fields, yet the concept of producer and worker was not in vogue. Nevertheless, the rich stratum used to be the owner of estates, slaves and riches, but enlightenment had bestowed comforts upon the slaves and the individuals belonging to the lower classes of society. Since people used to apply age-old sowing and harvesting techniques, a large part of the crops used to get destroyed because of natural calamities including heavy rains, pests, volcanoes and storms etc. The epidemics were also considered horrible, devastating and incurable, which used to cost thousands of life in one single sway. The medical treatment and other facilities were almost free that were granted by the state to the public. Modes of communications were simple, time consuming and economical, though it took several hours in moving from one city to the other on the back of camels, horses and carts. Construction projects also took months and even years in completion of the same, and people had to wait for long in bringing changes in their everyday lifestyle. Somehow, the advent of industrial revolution brought tremendous alterations in all walks of life in the aftermath of it. The industrialisation produced modern cultivation techniques, which were fast, supportive and comprehensive ones in their nature and scope. Advent of cultivation machinery including tractors, electric ploughs and other equipments made the cultivation process very easy. The advent of fertilisers and pesticides also multiplied the product of crops. The commodities were changed into several finished goods, and grinding, sugar, textile and paper industries also came into existence. The ox-carts and horse-carts were replaced by the railcars, motorcycles and motorcars, and travelling turned out to be extremely speedy and comfortable. The industrial revolution also paved the way towards the invention of life saving medicines, which decreased mortality rates to a great extent. It is modernity that gave birth to the concept of post-modernity. Post-modernity has blessed humanity with glorious liberty and freedom of thought and action. The like-minded people, residing in pole-apart areas of the world have come closer to one another through the air travelling, mobile phone technology and internet communication. The people now decide to get married after the birth of children. The individuals are deciding the life partner of their choice without paying any consideration to the caste, class, clan, race, ethnicity, religion and even gender of their partner. Post-modern literature reflects the relationship between the people belonging to divergent ethno-racial groups, pre-marital, extra-marital and homosexual relationships between the married and unmarried couples; in addition, it also openly discusses the sexual intercourse at professional levels, where the colleagues, secretaries and bosses appear to get indulged into illicit relationships with one another. Post-modern literature also reveals the transformation of the vast world into a small global village, where the governments and masses have developed friendly and cordial associations with one another by entering into business, social, economic, cultural and religious ties. Post-modernism has also introduced revolutionary changes in construction projects; consequently, high-rise buildings are being completed within days. Now, one can read and send one’s thoughts in the form of both prose and poetry to the yonder lands within few seconds. Post-modern era is startling in respect of the invention of the weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Terrorism and clashes between the civilisations have become the order of the day, and nations appear to be at daggers drawn on several controversial national and international issues at large. 4. Globalisation and Hyper-globalists, Internationalists/Sceptics, and Transformationalists: Globalisation is one of the most dominant, prominent and influential features attributed to the post-modernist societies of the globe. It simply means the universal sharing of the products, inventions, discoveries, ideas, researches and philosophy being produced by the individuals belonging to different countries, nations and societies. It is most-modern society that has produced multinational firms, organisations and companies, which are creating multiple items and commodities for the consumers at global scale. In addition, films, music, dance, songs and other recreational activities have also been globalised now. The people can watch the programmes of their personal choice related to their interests, faiths, tastes and aptitude by sitting in front of their television sets. One can trace the bio-data of its favourite celebrity and can communicate with him or her through various platforms. The existence of social and professional websites has also joined the like-minded people at large through one platform. The people now experience no problem in respect of selecting the attire, fashions, automobiles and recreational activities of their aptitude. Medical treatments and convalescent facilities have also found a sure headway during the globalisation process; the people can hire the services of specialist counsels and doctors to get cured completely. Although the nations have developed friendly ties under the congenial environment with one another; nevertheless, it has also given birth to countless problems and challenges; the wide-ranged tensions between the countries, conflict of ideologies, terrorism and destruction in the sacred names of religion, peace and solidarity. Post modern societies have paved the way towards the creation of hyper-globalists, internationalists, sceptics, and transformationalists. The concept hyper-globalists are the arch supporters of the globalisation of each and everything. They are of the opinion that no political policy, social activity or cultural trait is confined to one specific zone of the world in the contemporary era. On the other hand, post-modernist social establishment has given the message of universality and the concept of nation-state is fast declining. Instead of following the commands of the statesmen and political authorities of their nation, the people are now following the commands of the philosophers, writers, intellectuals, analysts and thinkers of international reputation and fame. The same is applied to the owners and entrepreneurs belonging to the firms and companies of multinational scale. Consequently, they imitate the ideas of intellectuals and welcome the commodities and fashions introduced by the entrepreneurs without taking their race, ethnicity origin or nationality into account. Hence, hyper-globalists are of the view that post-modern societies have encouraged universalism, equality, justice, human rights preservation, freedom and liberty to the individuals belonging to all races, ethnicities, religious beliefs and both the genders as well. The hyper-globalists also support the idea that no economy has remained confined to one political set up. On the contrary, almost all the economies have also been globalised through making huge exports and imports in bulk. Hence, the products created by the entrepreneur from a Chinese entrepreneur as well as the rice grown by a Pakistani farmer are consumed by the people living in the deserts of Africa, planes of Europe or the inhabitants of the Oceania. Internationalists/sceptics are the community or stratum of the thinkers that opine the contemporary era globalisation procedure as confined to the neighbouring regional zones only. They submit to state that the technological advancements has not affected the remote regions of the world to an imperative extent due to the very reality that trade relations among the nations seek their roots in the primitive and medieval times; it is therefore the trade has not observed such an expansion during the contemporary era as it is frequently claimed by the analysts. The sceptics make the very claim that globalisation has already taken place in the aftermath of industrial revolution and subsequent colonial era during eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, when the European nations had invaded on the poor and weak African and Asian countries by destroying their political structure and capturing their wealth and resources. They had not only inflicted their rule of law in those countries, but also imposed their culture and traditions on those hapless nations of the present day third world. In addition, the powerful European nations captured the raw material from the Asian and African states, and returned the same as finished goods against very heavy price. The Europeans had also made the indigenous population as their slaves, and dragged them for personal services or to sell them in the USA and Europe as herds of cattle. As a result, the black racial group had to lead a life of misery and abject humiliation for the future decades to come till they won equal rights and freedom by the last quarter of twentieth century. Since the present day international interactional activities do not influence other regions in the same intensity as these had been introduced during the colonial era; it is therefore, the post-modern age is the period of regionalism, where one or few states from every region of the world are regulating the affairs of their respective geographical zone. As a result, an overwhelming majority of the third world countries is still leading a life of dismay, decay and poverty, where its populations are dependent of the charity in the form of aid from the big and prosperous countries of the world. The present condition of the third world countries resembles with the proletariat class of Marxism, where their populations work very hard, render their sincere and loyal services to their occidental masters, but obtain almost nothing out of the hard efforts they have made at different positions and professions. As a result, the nation-state system is getting strengthened in the wake of globalisation phenomenon. Transformationlists, on the other hand, refute the possibility of one single cause behind globalisation. They do not appreciate the very notion that either political influence or scientific inventions or fast growing economic activities serves as the only stimulus behind giving a go to globalisation. On the other hand, they view the combination of all these forces as essential and inevitable for creating the notion globalisation, as well as transformations of the world societies within global perspective. Hence, globalisation has neither weakened the nation-state system, nor has it caused in the strengthening of the same. On the other hand, it has played very dynamic role in the transformation of ideologies, cultural traits, social norms, moral values and technological advancements all over the world. The transformationalists depict four dimensions of the globalisations procedure. The first one indicates the fast flow of political, cultural, social and religious philosophies and thoughts across the boundaries of the country, region and continent. It also includes the transformation of cultural values and technology. Secondly, globalisation has multiplied the activities related to business, trade and commerce. It is why almost all commodities and technological equipments are available against almost one and the same prices in all parts of the world. Thirdly, transportations and communications means have found abrupt boost in all corners of the earth without discrimination. Finally, one can hire the services of the professionals of one’s preference by entering into interaction with the lawyers, intellectuals, economists, writers, doctors, psychiatrists, photographers, actors, artists and painters etc. Hence, astounding revolution in communication means has helped out in bringing the social change and rapid transformation all over the world in general. Read More