Sociology

Portal

General aspects

History · Positivism · Antipositivism Functionalism · Conflict theory Social theory · Critical theory Structure & agency · Socialization Research · Public sociology Sociology of: culture · deviance economics · education · environment ethnicities · family · gender · health industry · internet · knowledge · law military · rationalization · religion science · secularization · stratification

Related fields and subfields

Criminology · Cultural anthropology Cultural studies · Islamic sociology Media studies · Medical sociology Political sociology · Social anthropology Social psychology · Sociobiology Socioeconomics · Sociolinguistics Statistics · Systems theory

Categories and lists

Journals · Publications · Outline List of sociologists · Index

v • d • e

This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2007)

Modernization is a concept used in sociology and politics. It is the view that a standard, teleological evolutionary pattern, as described in the social evolutionism theories, exists as a template for all nations and peoples.^[1][2] It should not be confused with the sociological concept of rationalization, or the concepts of urbanization and industrialization.

Contents 1 Theory 2 Criticism 3 See also 4 Notes 5 References

[edit] Theory

According to theories of modernization, each society would evolve inexorably from barbarism to ever greater levels of development and civilization. The more modern states would be wealthier and more powerful, and their citizens freer and having a higher standard of living. According to the Social theorist Peter Wagner, modernization can be seen as processes, and as offensives. The former view is commonly projected by politicians and the media, and suggests that it is developments, such as new data technology or dated laws, which make modernization necessary or preferable.^[3] This view makes critique of modernization difficult, since it implies that it is these developments which control the limits of human interaction, and not vice versa. The latter view of modernization as offensives argues that both the developments and the altered opportunities made available by these developments, are shaped and controlled by human agents. The view of modernization as offensives therefore sees it as a product of human planning and action, an active process capable of being both changed and criticized.^[3]

This was the standard view in the social sciences for many decades with its foremost advocate being Talcott Parsons. Hegel also viewed it as a "development of the rational and universal Mind towards self-conciousness and freedom."^[1] This theory stressed the importance of societies being open to change and saw reactionary forces as restricting development. Maintaining tradition for tradition's sake was thought to be harmful to progress and development.^[3] Proponents of Modernisation lie in two camps, optimists and pessimist. The former view what a modernizer would see as a setback to the theory (events such as the Iranian Revolution or the troubles in Lebanon) as temporary setbacks,^[4] with the ability to attain "modernism" still existing. Pessimists would argue that such non-modern areas are incapable of becoming modern.^[5]

[edit] Criticism

This approach has been heavily criticized, mainly because it conflated modernization with Westernization.^[1] In this model, the modernization of a society required the destruction of the indigenous culture and its replacement by a more Westernized one. Technically modernity simply refers to the present, and any society still in existence is therefore modern. Proponents of modernization typically view only Western society as being truly modern arguing that others are primitive or unevolved by comparison. This view sees unmodernized societies as inferior even if they have the same standard of living as western societies. Opponents of this view argue that modernity is independent of culture and can be adapted to any society. Japan is cited as an example by both sides. Some see it as proof that a thoroughly modern way of life can exist in a non-western society. Others argue that Japan has become distinctly more western as a result of its modernization. In addition, this view is accused of being Eurocentric,^[1][2] as modernization began in Europe with the industrial revolution, the French Revolution and the Revolutions of 1848,^[2][5] and has long been regarded as reaching its most advanced stage in Europe (by Europeans), and in Europe overseas (USA, Canada, Australia, New Zealand etc).^[2] Anthropologists typically make their criticism one step further generalized and say that this view is ethnocentric, not being specific to Europe, but Western culture in general.^[1]

[edit] See also

• Ecological modernization
• Modernization theory

[edit] Notes

[edit] References

Printed:

• Bernstein, H. (1971). "Modernization theory and the sociological study of development". Journal of Development Studies. 
• Brugger, Bill; Kate Hannan (1983). Modernisation and revolution. Routledge. ISBN 0709906951. 
• Dixon, Simon M. (1999). The modernisation of Russia, 1676-1825. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 052137961X. 
• Gavrov, Sergey (2005). "The phenomenon of modernization". Filozofia bliższa życiu. ISBN 8388953761. 
• Khan, Joel S. (2001). Modernity and exclusio. SAGE. ISBN 0761966579. 
• Leroy, Peter; Jan van Tatenhove (2000). "Political modernization theory and environmental politics". Environment and Global Modernity. 
• Macionis, John J.; Ken Plummer (2008). Sociology (4th edition ed.). Pearson Education. ISBN 0132051583.