MODERNIZATION AND

POST
MODERNIZATION
Introduction:
 Concept of Modern, Modernity and Modernisation are tremendously
notorious, mostly because of their ambiguity and vagueness. Each one lacks
any precise meaning. Modernisation has assumed a lot of significance
particularly after the end of the Second World War, in the 1950’s and 1960’s.
Industrial Revolution in England and to some extent, French Revolution in
France brought Modernization to limelight. Volumes of literature written
about these three concepts have contained many contradictory observations
and conclusions. As a result, no single theory of modernisation has been
justifiably presented to explain the process of modernisation for social
change. The process of modernisation dates back to the age of Renaissance
and formation in all walks of life-like literature, science religion etc.
Meaning of Modernity:
 In one sense, modernisation and modernity convey a classification of the history of mankind, into
Ancient, Medieval and Modern. Here modernity refers to the ‘stretch of time’, and each aforesaid
phase, carries its specialty. But, modernity in relation to time is also confusing, because, it may
mean one thing in India and another thing else-where on the earth.
 Modernity is distinguished from traditionalism and a modern society also differs from a traditional
one. It is equally difficult to define precisely what ‘Tradition’ is yet, both ‘tradition’ and
‘modernity’ are systems of ideas, values and Institutions, which are different from one another.
But, there is no society, which is either ‘purely traditional’ or ‘purely modern’. Both cannot be
rigidly compartmentalized.
 The term ‘Tradition’ has been defined by Dr. Yogendra Singh as “a cumulative heritage of a
society, which permits though all levels of social organisation, such as the value system, the social
structure and personality structure.” Thus, tradition is a social and cultural heritage and a
traditional society, therefore, contains three basic elements of tradition like value system, social
structure and structure of personality, which are more or less permanent.
The Concept of Modernity has following distinctive characteristics such as:
(i) Intellectual characteristics are like emphasis on science and technology, reason and rationality,
belief in progress and human development, control over environment and avoidance of superstition
and orthodoxy.
(ii) Political Characteristics, include marginalization of religious influence from State/Political
matters, and rise of secular democratic polity, universal adult suffrage, democratic values.
(iii) Religious Characteristics constitute a secularized society free from religious orthodoxy and
decline of religiosity.
(iv) Social Characteristics include decline of a traditional social order, decline of Joint family system,
alienated kinship ties
(v) In relation of education, it involves literacy, emphasis on knowledge, trained skill and the like.
(vi) Economic Characteristics include changing over to commercial agriculture, use of machines and
advanced technology in agriculture, growing industrialisation and urbanisation, improvement in
commerce, industry and growth of Market etc. Thus, modernity implies a bunch of new socio-
economic, politico-religious and intellectual system, totally separated from the traditional one.
The Concept of Modernization defined:
 The word modern or modernisation is the derivative of the Latin term ‘MODO’, which means ‘just now’ ‘or’
‘the latest’. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term ‘modern’ as ‘something of the recent times or
something new or latest, not concerned with classic. Thus, the literal meaning of the term refers to anything
which is New or Latest in life style, dress, art or thinking.
 Modernity and Progressivism in social change may also look alike. It may mean the society constantly moving
ahead in the direction of ‘Progress’ or improvement at all times. Modernisation as a historical process with
continuity also involves industrialization, urbanization, rationalization, bureaucratization, democratization,
secularization, sanskritisation, Tribalisation and the like rationality, reasoning with scientific temper and
outlook.
 The term modernisation has been severally defined by several eminent scholars and one of them is the Indian
sociologist Prof. Y. Singh who writes, “Modernisation symbolizes a rational attitude towards issues and their
evaluation from universalistic, not particularistic point of view. To him, Modernisation involves diffusing
scientific and technological know-how.
 C.E. Black in his book ‘Dynamics of Modernisation suggests modernisation as a process by which historically
evolved institution are adopted to the rapidly changing function that reflect the unprecedented increase in
man’s knowledge, permitting control over his environment in the recent centuries that accompanies the
scientific revolution.
 Thus, modernisation emphasizes upon the diffusion of new standards like scientific outlook, rationalism based
on reasoning, universalism, humanism, individualism, secularization, democratic liberalism and the like.
Application of scientific know-how to meet human requirements is also another aspect of modernisation. From
Psychological point of view, modernisation brings about changes in individuals motivation temperament
attitude personality and role-perception.
Dimensions of modernization:
 Modernisation is multi-dimensional in character. One may categories it into
social, psychological, intellectual, demographic, cultural, economic and
political dimensions. Modernisation at Political level is also known as
Political modernisation or Political development. Political modernisation has
its own distinct features. It rejects the traditional authorities like Feudal lords,
religious heads & god-heads and Traditional community leaders.
 Rather it implies the emergence of a single secular rational authority in a
political system to which people render habitual obedience. Political
modernisation, therefore involves increasing people’s participation in the
political process through Business groups, interest groups, political parties,
N.G.Os and voluntary organizations.
Thus, political modernisation includes:
(a) Increase in the capacity of the political system to find and utilize the resources of the society.
(b) Increase in the need for coordinated social action to solve all kinds of problems that a political
system faces and
(c) Increase in political participation.

Broadly speaking, modernisation has following salient features:

(1) A Scientific temper outlook., (2) Reasoning and rationalism
(3) Secularization, (4) High aspirations
(5) Total change in attitude, norms and values,
(6) Developed economy, (7) Broader national interest
(8) Democratization, (9) An open society.
(10) A challenging personality and finally
(11) Dynamic leadership to organize socio-economic cultural & political movement and undertake
reforms.
Steps to be taken for Modernisation:
 According to Rustow and Ward, steps to be taken for modernisation include the following:

1. Faster industrialisation of economy and adoption of scientific knowledge and technical know-how
to make industry, agriculture more productive and profitable in modernisation process.
2. Secularization of Ideas, values and rites
3. Increased social mobility.
4. Spread of scientific & technical education.
5. Higher standard of living and thinking
6. High degree of Urbanisation.
7. High level of literacy
8. Growing per-capita income.
9. Developed and wide spread mass media.
10. Better health & hygienic conditions for women & children.
11. Eradication of Poverty and Unemployment
12. Broader outlook to fight out superstition and blind-faith.
Preconditions of Modernisation:
 Modernisation of society through a switch-over, from traditionalism requires
certain essential pre-conditions.
Those are:
(1) Awareness of the people to accommodate to the new technology conditions
(2) A sense of urgency
(3) Availability of opportunities
(4) An emotional preparedness to accommodate the changeover from
traditionalism to modernism either slow or fast.
(5) Emergence of devoted, dynamic and committed leadership to lead the
modernized society
(6) Society’s inbuilt capacity for accommodating such transformation.
According to Myron Weiner, the main instruments which make
modernisation possible are:
(a) Education
(b) Developed Mass Communication both Print & Electronic Media (like
Telephone Radio, TV, Cinema, Newspaper, Book and Journals)
(c) Nationalist ideology and sense of Patriotism
(d) Charismatic national leadership,
(e) Strong and stable governmental authority to implement policies &
programmes directed for modernisation and to compel & force people to
accept such policies.
(f) Seminars and workshops to be held to highlight the influence & impact of
modernisation.
How to achieve Modernisation?
Modernisation can be achieved by two ways:
(1) by modifying the tradition and
(2) by criticizing the odd aspect of tradition.
Both these methods are regulated by two guidelines —such
as:
(a) unity and integrity of the Nation are not endangered
(b) Benefits of the modernisation Process are available to the
society and community as a whole and in no case, should one
alienate himself from the society and tradition. It should be strictly
ensured that all contemporary changes like ragging in educational
institution, eve-teasing, divorce, living together without being
married are not modern.
Conclusion:
 Modernisation involves transformation towards progress democratic, socio-economic
and scientific ideals. Modernisation as a process of change requires both structural and
functional changes. Mutual tolerance, respect for other’s views and equality among all
are the essential requisites of modernity.
 Modernisation does not mean elimination of all traditional and ancient values. Those
ancient values are to be preserved and protected along with induction and modernity has
to be intelligently solved to accommodate overall progress. Conflicts and problems are
bound to arise, but a dynamic leadership with a progressive and modern outlook is
required to solve these problems in time. Ultimately, the choice of proper leadership is
the sole responsibility of the conscious voters.
 India possesses vast cultural heritage and it is the overall responsibility of the people of
India at large and the popularity elected government. No Nation, not even India, can be
modernized without protection and preservation of its cultural heritage. No tradition
bound society is a backward society because a few traditional elements have universal
appreciation. India’s policy of non-alignment is founded upon the Ancient India’s
traditions of Non-Violence, peace and Fraternity.
 Modernisation in India is a continuous process of transformation from tradition to
modernity and these has to be a synthesis of tradition and modernity in India. Not all, but
a few traditions in India are partial to modernity and those traditions have to be preserved
and protected. Three views describe the tradition-modernity relationship one of them is
the optimistic outlook that supports faster westernization. The other view, obscurantism
believes in tradition and orthodoxy which are considered to be eternal and hence not to be
spared.
 The third and the most balanced view between the two, is called Progressivism’ which
believes in progress towards modernity without sacrificing the least traditional elements.
Only these orthodoxy elements which prevent progressivism have to be abandoned to
achieve modernity and socio-economic development quicker and in a planned manner.
 In India, Progressivism implies well-planned-Socio-Economic changes for the
community-welfare.
 It is debatable to identify which traditional and orthodox elements in India have to be cast
off and which have to be retained. Yet, the agreed view favoures a synthesis of tradition
and modernity.
 Lastly it is relevant and wise to cast off misconception of
modernity in India and to ban blindly aping the misconceived
modernity and westernization. But, that has to be done through
scientific outlook, tolerance and respect for others point of view
and without any coercive imposition.
 Hence in India, Modernity has to be belonged to coexist with
rationality based tradition and cultural heritage. Modernity and
Traditions are not poles apart and there has to be an agreed and
well-accepted synthesis between the two in India. India has to be
modernized and not westernized at the cost of the cultural past
and tradition.
POSTMODERNISM

Postmodernism, also spelled post-modernism, in

Western philosophy, a late 20th-century movement
characterized by broad scepticism, subjectivism, or
relativism; a general suspicion of reason; and an
acute sensitivity to the role of ideology in asserting
and maintaining political and economic power.
POSTMODERNISM AND MODERN PHILOSOPHY
 Postmodernism is largely a reaction against the intellectual assumptions and values of the
modern period in the history of Western philosophy (roughly, the 17th through the 19th
century). Indeed, many of the doctrines characteristically associated with postmodernism
can fairly be described as the straightforward denial of general philosophical viewpoints
that were taken for granted during the 18th-century Enlightenment, though they were not
unique to that period. The most important of these viewpoints are the following.
 1. There is an objective natural reality, a reality whose existence and properties are
logically independent of human beings—of their minds, their societies, their social
practices, or their investigative techniques. Postmodernists dismiss this idea as a kind of
naive realism. Such reality as there is, according to postmodernists, is a conceptual
construct, an artifact of scientific practice and language. This point also applies to the
investigation of past events by historians and to the description of social institutions,
structures, or practices by social scientists.
2. The descriptive and explanatory statements of scientists and historians can, in principle,
be objectively true or false. The postmodern denial of this viewpoint—which follows from
the rejection of an objective natural reality—is sometimes expressed by saying that there is
no such thing as Truth.
3. Through the use of reason and logic, and with the more specialized tools provided by
science and technology, human beings are likely to change themselves and their societies
for the better. It is reasonable to expect that future societies will be more humane, more
just, more enlightened, and more prosperous than they are now. Postmodernists deny this
Enlightenment faith in science and technology as instruments of human progress. Indeed,
many postmodernists hold that the misguided (or unguided) pursuit of scientific and
technological knowledge led to the development of technologies for killing on a massive
scale in World War II. Some go so far as to say that science and technology—and even
reason and logic—are inherently destructive and oppressive, because they have been used
by evil people, especially during the 20th century, to destroy and oppress others.
4. Reason and logic are universally valid—i.e., their laws are the same for, or apply equally to, any
thinker and any domain of knowledge. For postmodernists, reason and logic too are merely
conceptual constructs and are therefore valid only within the established intellectual traditions in
which they are used.
5. There is such a thing as human nature; it consists of faculties, aptitudes, or dispositions that are in
some sense present in human beings at birth rather than learned or instilled through social forces.
Postmodernists insist that all, or nearly all, aspects of human psychology are completely socially
determined.
6. Language refers to and represents a reality outside itself. According to postmodernists, language
is not such a “mirror of nature,” as the American pragmatist philosopher Richard Rorty
characterized the Enlightenment view. Inspired by the work of the Swiss linguist Ferdinand de
Saussure, postmodernists claim that language is semantically self-contained, or self-referential: the
meaning of a word is not a static thing in the world or even an idea in the mind but rather a range of
contrasts and differences with the meanings of other words. Because meanings are in this sense
functions of other meanings—which themselves are functions of other meanings, and so on—they
are never fully “present” to the speaker or hearer but are endlessly “deferred.” Self-reference
characterizes not only natural languages but also the more specialized “discourses” of particular
communities or traditions; such discourses are embedded in social practices and reflect the
conceptual schemes and moral and intellectual values of the community or tradition in which they
are used. The postmodern view of language and discourse is due largely to the French philosopher
and literary theorist Jacques Derrida (1930–2004), the originator and leading practitioner of
deconstruction.
7. Human beings can acquire knowledge about natural reality, and this knowledge can be justified
ultimately on the basis of evidence or principles that are, or can be, known immediately, intuitively,
or otherwise with certainty. Postmodernists reject philosophical foundationalism—the attempt,
perhaps best exemplified by the 17th-century French philosopher René Descartes’s dictum cogito,
ergo sum (“I think, therefore I am”), to identify a foundation of certainty on which to build the
edifice of empirical (including scientific) knowledge.

8. It is possible, at least in principle, to construct general theories that explain many aspects of the
natural or social world within a given domain of knowledge—e.g., a general theory of human
history, such as dialectical materialism. Furthermore, it should be a goal of scientific and historical
research to construct such theories, even if they are never perfectly attainable in practice.
Postmodernists dismiss this notion as a pipe dream and indeed as symptomatic of an unhealthy
tendency within Enlightenment discourses to adopt “totalizing” systems of thought (as the French
philosopher Emmanuel Lévinas called them) or grand “metanarratives” of human biological,
historical, and social development (as the French philosopher Jean-François Lyotard claimed).
These theories are pernicious not merely because they are false but because they effectively impose
conformity on other perspectives or discourses, thereby oppressing, marginalizing, or silencing
them. Derrida himself equated the theoretical tendency toward totality with totalitarianism.
 Postmodernism And Relativism
 As indicated in the preceding section, many of the characteristic doctrines of
postmodernism constitute or imply some form of metaphysical, epistemological, or ethical
relativism. (It should be noted, however, that some postmodernists vehemently reject the
relativist label.) Postmodernists deny that there are aspects of reality that are objective;
that there are statements about reality that are objectively true or false; that it is possible to
have knowledge of such statements (objective knowledge); that it is possible for human
beings to know some things with certainty; and that there are objective, or absolute, moral
values. Reality, knowledge, and value are constructed by discourses; hence they can vary
with them. This means that the discourse of modern science, when considered apart from
the evidential standards internal to it, has no greater purchase on the truth than do
alternative perspectives, including (for example) astrology and witchcraft. Postmodernists
sometimes characterize the evidential standards of science, including the use of reason and
logic, as “Enlightenment rationality.”
 Part of the postmodern answer is that the prevailing discourses in any society reflect the
interests and values, broadly speaking, of dominant or elite groups. Postmodernists
disagree about the nature of this connection; whereas some apparently endorse the
dictum of the German philosopher and economist Karl Marx that “the ruling ideas of
each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class,” others are more circumspect.
 Inspired by the historical research of the French philosopher Michel Foucault, some
postmodernists defend the comparatively nuanced view that what counts as knowledge
in a given era is always influenced, in complex and subtle ways, by considerations of
power. There are others, however, who are willing to go even further than Marx.
 The French philosopher and literary theorist Luce Irigaray, for example, has argued that
the science of solid mechanics is better developed than the science of fluid mechanics
because the male-dominated institution of physics associates solidity and fluidity with
the male and female sex organs, respectively. Similarly, the Bulgarian-born French
psychoanalyst and writer Julia Kristeva has faulted modern linguistics for privileging
aspects of language associated, in her psychoanalytic theory, with the paternal or
paternal authority (rule systems and referential meaning) over aspects associated with
the maternal and the body (rhythm, tone, and other poetic elements).
 Because the established discourses of the Enlightenment are more
or less arbitrary and unjustified, they can be changed; and because
they more or less reflect the interests and values of the powerful,
they should be changed. Thus postmodernists regard their
theoretical position as uniquely inclusive and democratic, because
it allows them to recognize the unjust hegemony of Enlightenment
discourses over the equally valid perspectives of nonelite groups.
In the 1980s and ’90s, academic advocates on behalf of various
ethnic, cultural, racial, and religious groups embraced postmodern
critiques of contemporary Western society, and postmodernism
became the unofficial philosophy of the new movement of
“identity politics.”