The emergence of the modernity in the West has caused social, cultural, economic, tech-nological, scientific, etc. changes. As a result of these changes, the West has dominated the world. Other countries that have fallen against the West have felt compelled to implement these changes. However, it has been seen that neither the authenticity of modernity nor the authentic life styles of traditional societies can be sustained. The West has overhauled (according to us, some postmodern exits are the attitude of modernity.) its own modernity and other nations (the West's other) produced their own modernity. This situation has been named as different, local, non-Western, fluid (liquidity), late, reflexivity, multiple, plural and high modernities. These nomenclatures show us that there is no universal and single modernity. However, all these nomenclatures do not provide an explanation of where the original distinction occurred. In this study, we tried to indicate that this distinction is related to ontological (faith) field and non-west nations without changing the ontological field can modernizng much could amentment in the formal field. In our study, we have used the term modernity in the sense of ontological modern and the term modernity in the sense of embracing modern institutions and rules without leaving the world's own faith and culture.
Modern, Modernity, Different modernities, Ontologically/Formal Modernity
|Yazar:||Selim SÖZER -|