But What is Modernity? Part II

-

But What is Modernity? Part II

July 8th, 2008 by waynemellinger
I have describe modernity as a term that is used to describe our contemporary era.  In it broadest sense modernity refers to the forms of social life that emerged in the 19th century, that involved industrial capitalism and urbanization, particularly as found in Western societies.  Of course, social life is very different in 2008 from 1908, and different in Mexico City than it is the Stockholm.
Clearly modernity takes many forms.
As I have been writing this blog I continually note features that seem uniquely “modern”.  What are the defining features of modernity?

Here is a list:
  1. industrialism
  2. capitalism
  3. urbanization
  4. rapid increase in sophistication of technology
  5. surveillance
  6. military / state power
  7. reflexive attitude
  8. dynamic nature and rate of social change
  9. persistent concern for examining everyday life through reflexive monitoring
  10. self-identity as a reflexive project
  11. globalization
  12. quest for authenticity
  13. individualism, loss of conenctedness
  14. awareness of the absurdity of existence
  15. ecological ruins
  16. massive levels of addiction
  17. mass inequality
  18. mass psychology of misery
  19. instant global communication
  20. civil inattention


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding the Structure and Agency Debate in the Social Sciences by Sherman Tan (2011)

-
Image
UNDERSTANDING THE “STRUCTURE” AND THE “AGENCY” DEBATE IN THE SOCIAL SCIENCES (This originally appeared in Habitus [Department of Sociology, Yale University] 2011, 1) Sherman Tan Introduction How should we, as social scientists, best comprehend the nature of social life and orga- nization? Are individuals in control of their own actions and destinies, or are they merely (and unconsciously) subject to particular social circumstances which determine their behavior? In other words, do human beings possess some degree of autonomy over their actions, or are they com- pelled to obey powerful “social forces” which exert control over them? All in all, these conten- tious questions form the basis for what has come to be known as the “structure-agency” debate in the social sciences. These sociological discussions are especially important, given that they are representative of certain (more fundamental) philosophical concerns, for instance, that of free-will, choice, an...
Read more

The Many Interaction Orders: Goffman, Rawls, Smith and the Plural Moral Terrains of Everyday Life (Revised)

-
Image
THE MANY INTERACTION ORDERS:   Goffman, Rawls, Smith and the Plural Moral Terrains of Everyday Life Wayne Martin Mellinger, Ph.D.   Editor’s Note (Updated Version Available): This essay has been substantially revised and expanded. A new, fully developed version— “Many Interaction Orders: Recognition, Inequality, and the Re-specification of Symbolic Interactionism (v.9)” —is now available on this site. The current version remains archived as an earlier draft in the development of this argument. Wayne Martin Mellinger, Ph.D. December 2025 I. WALKING THROUGH MULTIPLE WORLDS The idea came to me not in a library or seminar room but on an ordinary Tuesday afternoon, walking through Ventura after a morning court appearance. Inside the courthouse I had been questioned sharply by a prosecutor and reprimanded by a judge—a ritual drama of authority and submission where every muscle in one's face must be managed with exquisite care. The courtroom is its own dense moral universe:...
Read more

George Herbert Mead and the Making of Symbolic Interactionism (Revised)

-
George Herbert Mead and the Making of Symbolic Interactionism: Expanding the Analysis and Contrasting with Critical Interactionism/EMCA Wayne Martin Mellinger, Ph.D. Part I: Why Mead Still Matters George Herbert Mead (1863–1931) was a foundational figure in American sociology and philosophy whose ideas laid the groundwork for the school of thought known today as symbolic interactionism. Though Mead never published a book in his lifetime, his posthumously compiled lectures, most notably Mind, Self, and Society (1934), shaped the intellectual trajectory of social psychology, microsociology, and interactionist theory. Rooted in the pragmatist tradition and deeply influenced by developments in psychology, philosophy of mind, and evolutionary theory, Mead's work continues to animate contemporary discussions about the social construction of self, meaning, and society. Why This Text Matters for Critical Interactionism For scholars working within Critical Interactionism, Mead repres...
Read more