Difficulties in the Definition and Self-Conception of “Modernity” and the Emergence of “Historical Thinking”

There are few concepts with such positive associations in both everyday and scientific language as the term “modern.” In contrast, “not modern” normally has a negative association without any further clarification being needed. When someone discovers characteristics and traits of modernity in a work by Dante, he thereby claims to have proven its historical significance, indeed, its artistic rank. Conversely, if one can show that Descartes had in certain respects not “as yet” fully executed the turn toward modern thinking and hence still retains certain aspects of the old thinking, it no longer appears necessary to engage his thought under these aspects.

However, if we ask what content we associate with the term “modern,” we find ourselves confronted by a plurality of meanings that render it practically impossible to determine what should be accorded an object, a person, a theory, or a historical movement judged “modern.” Even if one disregards ordinary language with its often arbitrary associations and concentrates on the scientific analyses that seek to determine what is unique about the modern age, merely the question of when this age begins and (possibly) ends yields such multifaceted and disparate answers in the relevant research that it appears doubtful whether the term “modern” can at all serve to denote a unitary historical epoch or a certain developmental phase.

Many renowned and competent researchers would argue that modernity begins with the Middle Ages or with antiquity, that is, with exactly those epochs from which the general consensus distinguishes modernity.