Baidu's definition of modernity is this: the "modernity" we understand now refers to the era when the "new" world system was formed since the Enlightenment. Time concept of continuous progress, purposeful and irreversible development. Modernity has promoted the historical practice of the nation-state, formed the political and legal ideas of the nation-state, established an efficient social organization mechanism, and created a set of values centered on freedom, democracy and equality. This is a general statement, which roughly means that the integrated system of time concept, social system, values and so on formed since the Enlightenment is modernity.
Habermas studies modernity from a philosophical perspective. He regards modernity as a new social knowledge and era, and replaces the traditional models and standards that have fallen apart with new models and standards. As the characteristic and contribution of modernity of an era, it is the freedom for individuals to choose themselves and realize the subject value. In Modernity-Unfinished Project, he defined that modernity consciousness is a kind of resistance to the classical tradition and modernity of the spirit of the times. This definition regards modernity as a concept of development, which exists with the progress of the times and is relative to the classical tradition.
In Modernity, Modernism, Modern Culture —— Variations on a Modern Theme, Kalinescu also put forward a similar definition: Modernity is a historical/temporal concept, which refers to the understanding of the present in a unique historical modernity, that is, it should be understood in distinguishing the present from the past and various residual features, and in the promise of future trends.
Giddens studied modernity from the perspective of sociology, so he regarded modernity as a "post-traditional order". He believes that modernity is the abbreviation of modern society or modern industrial civilization, which involves the system level, concept level and attitude level of modernity. The system level is the surface of modernity, which is embodied in a material system with clear standards and rules, that is, a social system designed and operated according to rationality. The concept level is in the deep layer of modern structure, which is human values, primitive experience and primitive morality, and has entrusted the spiritual ideal of human and social development. The attitude level is embodied in "self-identity" and reflects people's subjective attitude.
Many people's definitions of modernity are listed. To sum up, combined with my own thinking, the essence of modernity is to replace virtue with progress, believe and establish man's dominant position in nature, and transform the world through rational enlightenment.
Modernity should represent the transformation from tradition to modernity, that is, a break with some traditions. Since it is a fracture, it is actually divided into two parts, one is the subversion of tradition, and the other is the establishment and reorganization of a new order.
I just want to talk about Lu Xun. Different from the pioneer of social reform, modernity is a specious concept for Lu Xun, who calls for the liberation of personality, but at the same time laughs at its naivety; He approached Nietzsche but refused to go any further. Because the old tradition has been proved out of date, but the new order has made him-at least in his time-unable to see the way forward. But he resolutely criticized the national character and rebelled against tradition. In Diary of a Madman, he praised Awakening, but in subsequent works, such as The True Story of Ah Q and The Storm and Medicine, his emphasis shifted to criticizing the national character. It is hard to say whether this is intentional or not, but at least, the enthusiasm for modernity is intangible. In fact, from Loneliness, In a Restaurant and Weeds, we can even see his implicit rejection of modernity-he doesn't believe in the hope of modernity and the promise of permanent progress, because he only gives life its meaning, and only in its process, it seems that the only thing that can be grasped is walking. However, giving life itself and its process full meaning means the loss of ultimate meaning. Without the divine care of God, we can only mean the impossibility of universal ethics after subverting tradition. In their time, we seemed to see only one ending-the grave.
Come on, we must answer questions about good and evil, desire and belief, the tears of victims and the tyranny of indulgers, and whether the awakening of reason is consistent with the ultimate well-being of mankind. After the murder of God, does the exchange of places between man and God mean the absolute rule of evil? This is an inevitable test for us, testing everyone who tries to think about modernity-the present life is still an eternal appeal.