Modernity in India

Some people think that whatever is contemporary, is modern. Our idea-fashions and even, ideology and traditions, which characterize our life today is all modern. which is contemporary and is therefore categorized as modern. Fundamentalism, terrorism, increasing communalism and rapid incidence of corruption are likewise contemporary, and therefore, they are all modem. Such an under­standing of modernity is erroneous.

The layman's understanding about modernity is that it is technological only. In other words, if there is new technology, or innovation, it is said to be the attainment of modernity. The advancement in communicator agriculture and transport is considered by common people as the only criterion of modernity. In Dipankar's views, technology is only one part of modernity. Modernity involves certain other features also such as human values and relationships.

Admittedly, the modern society is a consumer society. In U.S. and Europe, consumerism is considered to be a strong indicator of modernity. More there is consumerism, more there is modernity. Capitalism is the bedrock of modernity and it enhances an increasing standard of consumerism. The situation in India is different. In our country, consumerism has given rise to inequality; the poor have become poorer in the race of uplifting their standard. And, in such a situation, it is mistaken to align modernity with increasing consumerism.

It is unfortunate that in India modernization, somehow or other. is associated with unlawful, illegal and violent behaviour. Those who are affluent, often commit crime. Dipankar Gupta comments as under on this mistaken aspect of modernity:

"In India, we have not paid attention on the mainsprings of modernity, but have been quick to declare certain sectors as modern because of their acquisition of artefacts and technology. This has also led to frequent complaints against modernity, especially when egregious offences are committed in contemporary locales or their perpetrators are those who were mistakenly seen as modern because they possessed explosive material objects. Thus, sexual harassment, violence in public places, dowry deaths and a host of other fairly uncivilized forms of conduct get posted as modern. Looked at closely, none of these things is really modern. They arc carry-overs of attitudes from the past."

In most of the cases, the elites and the middle class define traditionalism as modernization. What has happened in India is that in the wake of modernization, traditionalism is strengthened. Some of our traditions have been redefined as modernity. Caste is reorganized to suit to the needs of the politicians. Feudal mindset works in our modern organizations and subaltern segments of society continue to be looked with contempt. Most of the abuses of our translations are interpreted as items and aspects of modernity. Fundamentalism and the ideology of Hindutva could be referred to as new forms of modernity. In fact, traditionalism has re-appeared in new form of modernization, Such a modernization is fake and erroneous.

India's modernity is specific to Indian social structure. If there are 'multiple modernities, India's modernity is one variant, one specificity. If modernity is multi-dimensional, Indian modernity is determined by Indian traditions. Here, there is modernization traditions. It is because of the specificity of Indian social structure modernity can't be explain without reference to its traditions.

Both 'Yogendra Singh' and 'Dipankar Gupta' accept that modernity, in a way or the other, either strengthens traditions or traditions are mistaken as modernity. What is modernity? In the Indian context, the consensus is that it has' universalistic norms, there is emphasis on achievement, its roots are in secularism, it is democratic in its design and media, communication, values, morals and ethics are its dimensional features. And, then, importantly, which is the direction of modernization or social change? How do we define modernity in the light of change studies, which are available to us in Indian sociology? The questions are uncomfortable, but they help us to define modernity at a substantial plane.

Modernization and social change in India:-

The policies of the Indian nation-state and its constitution revolve round making India a modern nation. It means we have adopted modernization as our goal. In other words, capitalism, democracy, ­rationality, industrialism, science and technology and above - secularism constitute our society's structure and value components. It is also expected that our categorical values would provide us continuity. It should also be clear that national social structure should aim to attain secularism, democracy, rationality and equal relations between people as a mark of modernity.

Sociology n Truth

What is truth ? it is always very important question in all discourse.. Man is a product of history and hence of becoming; there is nothing in him that is either given or defined in advance. History begins nowhere and it ends nowhere. Everything in man has been made by mankind in the course of time. Consequently, if truth is human, it too is a human product. Sociology applies the same conception to reason. All that constitutes reason, its principles and categories, has been made in the course of history.

Everything is a product of certain causes. Phenomena must not be represented in closed series: things have a 'circular' character, and analysis can be prolonged to infinity. if anyone try to explain to explain truth psychologically and subjectively. However, the nature of the individual is too limited to explain alone all things human. Truth, reason and morality are the results of a becoming that includes the entire unfolding of human history.

experience can take place on one level only. Reason is placed on the same plane as sensitivity; truth, on the same plane as sensations and instincts. But men have always recognised in truth something that in certain respects imposes itself on us, something that is independent of the facts of sensitivity and individual impulse. Such a universally held conception of truth must correspond to something real. It is one thing to cast doubt on the correspondence between symbols and reality; but it is quite another to reject the thing symbolised along with the symbol. This pressure that truth is seen as exercising on minds is itself a symbol that must be interpreted, even if we refuse to make of truth something absolute and extra-human. in reality truths and errors are mixed, the latter having often been moments in the evolution of truth. In the history of creations, there are unforeseeable novelties.
truth changes at the same time. Truth, one could say, is enriched; but it does not really change. It has certainly been enlarged and increased in the course of the development of history; but saying that truth grows is quite different from saying that it varies in its very nature.

above i have produced some views of Emile Durkheim on this very issue .....