Beyond the dichotomy: Tradition in modernity

The paradigm of ‘multiple modernities’ associated with the civilisational theory of S N Eisenstadt and Johann Arnason has emerged as one of the most ambitious attempts to go beyond Eurocentric conceptions of modernity. Underpinning its project to ‘multiply modernity’ is a distinctive take on the ‘cultural turn’ that characterised late twentieth century social theory; in contrast to the idea that modernity is a universal, culture-neutral formation, it argues that diverse traditions (including those which demarcate civilisations) have played a formative role in the emergence of multiple forms of modernity. However, this line of argument runs counter to some entrenched assumptions about the relationship between modernity and tradition. The idea that tradition is eroded in modernity was one of the most powerful legacies of classical social thought, and has been given a new lease of life in recent debates. In this paper, I contrast the multiple modernities understanding of the role of tradition in the modern world with the revival of classical assumptions evident in Anthony Giddens’ notions of detraditionalisation and post-traditional society. I argue that Giddens ultimately perpetuates the dichotomising tendency evident in the classical conceptions of modernity as the ‘opposite’ or absence of tradition, while the multiple modernities approach opens up fertile conceptual means for grasping the interpenetration of tradition and modernity. I argue further that the two approaches’ divergent assessments of the role of tradition in the contemporary world can be traced to their divergent understandings of what tradition is