On the Co-existence of Modernity and Tradition

Modernity and tradition are often seen as antagonistic forces, especially in the non-western world, which might be due to the western origins of modernity and the general way in which it is perceived. If we do consider both as contradictory (“you can’t be modern and traditional at the same time”), then, by basic logic, the co-existence of modernity and tradition becomes an impossibility.

But, if we conceive modernity as a dialectical system, something which continuously evolves by the overcoming of its internal and external contradictions, we shall be able to see the possibility of the co-existence of modernity and tradition. So, modernity is not a static thing, but, on the contrary, it is an ongoing process. Modernity has its own values, beliefs, and practices that we deem as “modern”. 

But, how do we frame a definition of tradition? Tradition may be defined as a set of beliefs, values, customs, etc. that have their origins in the past, before modernity. Of course, there is no one way to be “traditional” (similar to how one might argue for the existence of more than one way to be modern). That is to say, different communities have different traditions, and so on. If we stick to this definition of tradition, then religious beliefs, practices, and values would also come under the umbrella of tradition. 

From the above definitions and features of modernity and tradition, it might be possible to see how both can co-exist. For example, a person might hold some beliefs that are “modern” in nature and others that can be referred to as “traditional”. In this case, the individual is both modern and traditional.

The co-existence of modernity and tradition can be easily seen in the west—the church has gone through several reform movements to make their religion modern. As religion is something traditional, the concept of “modern religion” in itself implies modernity and tradition existing alongside each other. 

In the non-western world (India, for example), however, it is not the case. There are mostly two cases that are to be found in the general public: 1) anti-west people who believe modernity is western and is something that affects society negatively as it opposes the values of their religion and tradition; and 2) people who are pro-west and believe modernity is a positive force and that tradition is something regressive that is to be overcome. 

At least this was the case until some years ago, when something changed (speaking in the Indian context only). Recent religious movements in India, which have become quite popular and gained significant support, serve as an example of the co-existence of modernity and tradition. The people supporting these movements claim that their religion is modern and its practices are completely “scientific”. They also believe that the west has stolen all “their science” from them. 

Now, this phenomenon is interestingly modern and traditional at the same time. Traditional because of the active support for religion and modern because of a kind of cultural appropriation of science (belief and trust in science and actively appealing to science for every kind of issue is a characteristic feature of modernity).

Speaking in relation to this example only, this kind of coexistence does undermine the mandate of modernity. Most of the arguments used to justify religious practices as scientific are pseudoscientific in nature. The rise of pseudoscience can hurt the advancement of actual science, thereby causing a deterioration in the process of modernity.