“Reflexive modernity” is a new concept that has important theoretical implications. This concept was first introduced in a work titled “Reflexive Modernity: Politics, Tradition, and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order” by Anthony Giddens, Ulrich Beck, and Scott Lash. This article attempts to examine the hidden aspects of the new modernity through a critique and interpretation of the central idea of this work and to show how the positive idea of reflexive modernity can be a precursor to the emergence of a negative and crisis-ridden concept of modernity. This article is organized at three levels of description, analysis, and reflection: first, at the descriptive level, we introduce the main elements that constitute “reflexive modernity.” Second, at the analytical level, we try to look at “between the lines,” in Leo Strauss’s terms, and reveal the hidden aspects of this idea. Here, we will show that in the conceptualizations made, there are always two competing scenarios: a positive and ideal scenario and a negative and anti-ideal scenario. The first scenario seems to be the overt and covert approach of this idea. Finally, as a reflection, we will discuss the idea of “crisis-ridden modernity” and show how, in the shadow of the increasing strengthening of modernism, we are witnessing the increasing weakening of modernity.
“Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition, and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order” is considered one of the most important scientific works on modernity, in which Anthony Giddens, Ulrich Beck, and Scott Lash, three of the world's most prominent sociologists, attempt to answer fundamental questions about modernity. They believe that today's modernity is fundamentally different from classical modernity and is different in nature and mechanism. Reflexive modernity is a new era; an era in which modern man pauses on the path of modernization and contemplates the fears and hopes ahead; he contemplates the victories and defeats of the past and resumes his path in a reflexive and revisionist manner. This work shows that in the new era, our understanding of politics, tradition, nature, and society has undergone major changes. In this work, a new theory of reflexive modernity is proposed. The authors of this book pursue two main goals by proposing this theory: first, to create a new orientation in sociology and second, to create an institutional counterpoint to postmodern theory. Therefore, it can be said that postmodernism relies on the deconstruction of modern social understanding, but reflexive modernity offers a reconstructive view. This theory, focusing on new social relations in the West, is also influenced by the theories of postindustrial society and postmaterialist society. With the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the so-called Eastern Bloc, the globalization of capitalism, and the advancement of technology, a new formation of the contemporary world order has emerged, and social life and the natural environment have undergone radical transformations and metamorphoses. In this new era, the concept of modernity has become more distant from its classical version. Although these authors have different opinions on various issues, the starting point of their discussion is the emergence of a new type of modernity, which they call "reflexive modernity." The central idea of their discussion is based on the transition in the modern. This means that the era of simple or classical modernity has ended and we are witnessing the beginning of the era of reflexive or late modernity. The concept of reflexive modernity is of great theoretical importance and evaluates contemporary developments through the lens of developments in modernity. As we know, the emergence of classical modernity is considered a point of rupture from the static state of tradition and an end to the reproducing society. In fact, the emergence of the modern is accompanied by important “endings” and “beginnings,” and the fate of the modernity project can change the fate of social developments on a global scale. Reflexive modernity establishes a different relationship with tradition. In fact, if classical modernity identified itself in opposition to tradition, now reflexive modernity identifies itself not in opposition to tradition but in dialogue with it. The concept of “risk society” in Beck, the concept of “institutional rethinking” and “post-traditional society” in Giddens, and the concept of “community rethinking” and “reflexive traditionalization” in Scott Lash all refer to establishing an epistemological dialogue between tradition and modernity. Of course, it is worth remembering that Beck, Giddens, and Lash published their theory under the original title of “reflexive modernization,” but in the core and text of the theory, it can be easily seen that they are talking more than anything about a kind of ideal called “reflexive modernity.” The review of the aforementioned book is based on the methodology of text analysis and includes three stages of description, analysis and criticism. Based on this method, first the objective information of the work is transmitted, then we try to examine the structures and meanings, and finally, based on evidence-based judgment, we will analyze the hidden aspects in the authors' theory and based on that we will formulate the critical theory in the context of simple modernity. Based on what has been said, the type of this research is qualitative, its approach is critical, and its data collection method is based on library and documentary. In the following, after presenting the theoretical background, we first provide a comprehensive description of the concept of reflexive modernity, then analyze this concept, and finally, based on the analysis presented, we will criticize and propose the new concept of "crisis-ridden modernity". In concluding part, I should mention that the article has criticized and examined the idea of reflexive modernity at three levels and finally concluded that the book has misunderstandings about the nature and essence of the modernity, so the book mainly talks about modernism and wrongly affiliates the attributions of modernism to modernity. Modernity per se has nothing to do with the triumph of technology and capitalism directly. Modernity first and foremost has constructed on two main bases: human rationality or even wisdom and human rights. While Modernism is about conversion to “the modern”. This conversion takes many forms. In its most radical form, modernism can become an ideological conception of modernity that attempts to present the experience of Western modernization as the only path to modernization and to extend it to the entire world, a conception that ultimately leads to imperialism. In its most moderate form, modernism is a tendency to realize the modern within the traditional contexts of collective life. Here, we see that modernism is more concerned with the outward practices of the modern. Rather than being an existential and essential process, it is a pragmatic and formalistic practice. The article, by proposing the concept of crisis-ridden modernity has attempted to reveal the hidden aspects of reflexive modernity. Under the concept of crisis-ridden modernity, it has been argued that the two main foundations of modernity have been undermined under the hegemony of modernism, and this has subjected modern individuality to an epistemological crisis. Reflexive modernity finds meaning in the shadow of a global super trend; a super trend that sociologists call “individualization.” This super trend can take two completely different directions. On the one hand, it can lead to individualization and strengthen modernity. On the other hand, it can lead to de-individuation and subject modernity to an epistemological crisis.