In this major theoretical statement, the author offers a new and provoctive interpretation of institutional transformations associated with modernity. What is modernity? The author suggests, "As a first approximation, let us simply say the following: 'modernity' refers to modes of social life or organization which emerged in Europe from about the seventeenth century onwards and...
In this major theoretical statement, the author offers a new and provoctive interpretation of institutional transformations associated with modernity. What is modernity? The author suggests, "As a first approximation, let us simply say the following: 'modernity' refers to modes of social life or organization which emerged in Europe from about the seventeenth century onwards and which subsequently became more or less worldwide in their influence." We do not as yet, the author argues, live in a post-modern world. The distinctive characteristics of our major social institutions in the closing years of the twentieth century suggest that, rather than entering into a period of post-modernity, we are moving into a period of "high modernity" in which the consequences of modernity are becoming more radicalized and universalized than before. A post-modern social universe may eventualy come into being, but this as yet lies on the other side of the forms of social and cultural organization that currently dominate world history. In developing a fresh characterization of the nature of modernity, the author concentrates on the themes of "security versus danger and o "trust versus risk. Modernity is a double-edged phenomenon. The development of modern social institutions has created vastly greater opportunities for human beings to enjoy a secure and rewarding existencethan in any type of pre-modern system. But modernity also has a somber side that has become very important in the present century, such as the frequently degrading nature of modern industrial work, the growth of totalitarianism, the threat of environmentsal destruction, and the alrming development of military power and weaponry. The book builds upon the author's pevious theoretical writings and will be of great interest to those who have followed his work through the years. However, this book covers issues the author has not previously analyzed and extends the scope of his work into areas of pressing practical concern.
0 有用 南雾 2020-11-27
一个月内读三遍,满脑子时空分离与脱域,后面现代性的维度与全球化的维度分析非常像韦伯的理想型 即是理想概念集
0 有用 fka EyeCU 2019-04-16
感觉吉登斯在当代社会理论大家里面不算是特别有创见的一个......看这本书感觉是个大型文献综述。另外感觉他的问题意识跟21世纪有点隔膜,感觉21世纪非但没有在朝着超越现代性的方向发展,反而奔着早期现代性的问题走回头路......
1 有用 [已注销] 2011-01-26
吉登斯在理论的综融和应用上达到了难以企及的高度,虽是探讨现代性,吉登斯理论上广阔的视野和联系会让理论和背景准备不足的读者无所适从。
1 有用 stephanie 2012-11-28
摩登大师
1 有用 lesleygreytear 2011-10-01
经过课上牛人们众说纷纭的祛魅,吉登斯为了区别自己所提出的社会学意义上的现代性和从文化角度出发的后现代理论,有选择性反驳、自说自话之嫌;另外最后一章其对社会学意义上的后现代的设想,即超越资本主义秩序的“现实主义乌托邦”,完全有hold不住的感觉——读中文译文的时候这种高瞻远瞩挥斥方遒的赶脚反而一点不违和呀。。。
0 有用 魍汐 2021-01-31
institutional analysis of modernity
0 有用 南雾 2020-11-27
一个月内读三遍,满脑子时空分离与脱域,后面现代性的维度与全球化的维度分析非常像韦伯的理想型 即是理想概念集
0 有用 飞佳 2020-08-11
语言垃圾看完中文译本后豁然开朗
0 有用 竹子31 2020-04-06
Disembedding这个概念真的非常好
0 有用 fka EyeCU 2019-04-16
感觉吉登斯在当代社会理论大家里面不算是特别有创见的一个......看这本书感觉是个大型文献综述。另外感觉他的问题意识跟21世纪有点隔膜,感觉21世纪非但没有在朝着超越现代性的方向发展,反而奔着早期现代性的问题走回头路......