viniketa wrote:Another marked characteristic of modernity is anthropocentrism. Perhaps we may not move beyond modernity until we move beyond anthropocentric thinking.
Let me take a wild guess. We should be Dharma-centric, right? Coz that's how the universe works.
"Dharma", in itself, may be too broad a term to be useful in this instance. "Biocentric" or, even better, "ecocentric" thinking is the direction pointed-to. See here
jeeprs wrote:For convenience's sake, I think 'modernity' can be seen as the period between the publication of Newton's Principia Mathematica, in 1687, and the publication of Einstein's four seminal papers in 1905 (including Special Relativity).
That may be a bit too
convenient. Even the standard model in physics didn't start to unwind with the theory of general relativity (although it may be at the root the subsequent unwinding). If we are speaking about the prevailing weltanschauung
, I would argue we are still in the modern era. As tobes alluded earlier, all the "deconstruction" of modernity is simply another form of constructing modernity. Until we begin to base action in something other than anthropocentric thinking, we will remain in modernity.
As for Hegel's reputation, I don't want to defend him (all my Hegel literature was given away long ago), but once you get into the rhythm of his words, he is much less obscure. One thing to keep in mind, for Hegel (and many other German philosophers), Weltgeist
really means germanische Geist