will examine the possibility that belief in a single religious truth declines with “modernization.” Although modernization is a vague term, there is some agreement on its elements: material affluence, urbanization, the prevalence of large bureaucratic organizations, and mass exposure to significant
took for granted in the past. In other words, ethical traditions, either old or new, have changed in the process of modernization and in the context of globalization. What does it mean for ethical traditions to change along with modernization? To answer this question, we must examine what we mean by
© Koninklijke Brill NV, Leiden, 2010 DOI: 10.1163/187471610X505942 Journal of Persianate Studies 3 (2010) 31-45 brill.nl/jps The History of Modernization of Law * Mohammad- ʿ Ali Forughi Translated by Manouchehr Kasheﬀ Abstract Mohammad ʿ Ali Khan, Zokā’ al-Molk, later Forughi, became Minister
-Bornu to Cairo, systematic state sponsorship for Islamic learning abroad obtained neither in precolonial times nor in the postcolony after 1966. Arabic-speaking scholarship winners, hereafter ‘Arabophones’, 1 were the objects of overlapping projects that sought in different ways to ‘modernize’ them and
Hugh D. Hudson
provides us therefore a window onto the social order within which political power manifested itself and a better appreciation of the difficulties of reform and modernization. 1 Starting with Peter I the dominant justification of Imperial power shifted somewhat from the earlier church inspired myth of
Long before 1979, Chinese historical research had been dominated by the theory of “the Five Modes of Production”, according to which the whole Chinese history as well as the other parts of the world had been developed from the first MOD to the last one by one. The modernization theories prevailed during the 1950s and the 1960s, bringing about another uni-linear model of historical changes. For example, W. W. Rostow designed a five-stage process as a universal frame work of economic development, based on which each society could find its position in this uni-line. The task of the less developed societies is just to introduce modernity from the modernized societies so that they can make some developments. Thus modernization is a uni-direction movement as well as a uni-linear process. After 1979, modernization as a new paradigm has been accepted by an increasing number of Chinese historians. The increasing depth and breadth of the academic researches have encouraged such an acceptance, but, admittedly, as a new conceptual system that corresponded to the historic breakthrough and the new direction towards modernization in China. This acceptance also showed the “crisis of paradigm”, that is, the contradiction between the new themes and the old ones that had dominated Chinese humanities and social sciences. The modernization paradigm based on monistic multi-linear theory considers modernization as a unique breakthrough in history, a great transformation around the whole world, and a historical process that does not have a given ultimate aim and value but different models and routes. The monistic multi-linear theory on historical development is open and all-embracing in historical studies. A variety of historical paradigms is favorable to prosperity of Chinese history.
Corné J. Rademaker and Henk Jochemsen
issues subsequently in sections 3.3 and 3.4, but first, in section 3.2, we will take a closer look at the council’s understanding of development , with particular reference to agricultural development . 3.2 Tradition and Modernization The council’s view on professional aid as being
Sedentarisation and Its Impact on the Life and Livelihood of Kazakh Pastoralists in Xinjiang
‘modernisation.’ In his opinion, ‘mobile pastoralism’ was ‘backward’ and needed to be abolished; sedentarisation and non-pastoral livelihoods were the only options for pastoralists to modernise. My discussion with Zhao is illustrative of the ongoing debate in China about conditions under which ‘modernisation
Edited by Vajpeyi
Contributors are Cheryl L. Brown, Paul Chao, Chu-Yuan Cheng, NarNarayan Das, Steven Haverkamp, Ouyang Kang, Arthur Mu-sen Kao, James T. Myers, Dhirendra K. Vajpeyi, Ranbir Vohra, and Taifa Yu.
thereafter. Throughout the nineteenth century we find on-going processes of modernisation, from the end of the Napoleonic War and the foundation of Norway as an independent state in 1814, up to the introduction of parliamentarianism in 1884: a shift of power in favour of the popular movements and the