"Reflexive modernity is primarily defined by an increase in the awareness of risk, uncertainty, contingency and insecurity and by an increase in attempts to colonize and control the near and distant future" (Ekberg 345). This is especially in response to modern science and technology (Ekberg 345). It revolves "around the production of knowledge, the avoidance of risk and the preservation of nature" (Ekberg 347) as opposed to industrial modernity which oriented around producing goods, avoiding scarcity, and controlling nature (Ekberg 347). According to Giddens, in reflexive modernity, society is not limited by tradition, and instead identity is built upon "past actions, present opportunities and future potential" (Ekberg 354). It is an individual response to the uncertainty (Ekberg 354), and is a "response to the collapse of unchallenged traditions" (Ekberg 355). Giddens thinks reflexivity is not being aware of what will happen because of uncertainty, and it is a 'reflex' which is a result of not being able to plan since the future is unknown (Ekberg 355). The future may be unknown because we can't know due to limitations of science or our understanding, lack of knowledge transmission or distribution, lack or concern or resistance to knowledge, lack of assurance that what is presented is 'true', understanding that knowledge is open to interpretation and socially constructed, or understanding that knowledge can be wrong. Beck states that "unawarenes can be known or not known, concrete or theoretical, unwillingness to know or inability to know" (Beck 1999, 121and Ekberg 355). It addresses the idea that "more and better knowledge results in an increase in ignorance" (Beck 140 and Ekberg 356) because the more knowledge that we gain the less we know about the risks that could result from this. It is concerned with "promoting a better quality of life, reducing risks to health and the environment, assessing the impact of emerging technologies on society and ensuring the safety, security and survival of life on earth" (Ekberg 357). According to Beck (1995), this is a shift to ecological politics, and according to Giddens, this is a shift to life politics.
Decision-making power in reflexive modernity is through "authoritarian-technocracy" (Beck 1995 and Ekberg 358) and this threatens the democratic process because decisions"made by scientists "threaten democracy because they are made by unelected experts, without consultation in the public sphere and without the consent of citizens (Ekberg 358). There is a consensus that "technological progress translates into social progress" (Eberg 358-9). This leaves the goals of 16th century scientific revolution fulfilled but not the 18th century democratic revolutions (Ekberg 358).
Definitions
Giddens (1990) defines reflexivity as using new knowledge to organize socially and for self identity. It is "a process of continuous monitoring and surveillance" which adjusts with the input of new information (Ekberg 354). This reflexivity makes the social group flexible and fluid because it continues to readjust based on new information. This fluidity is related to Zygmunt Bauman's (2000) ideas of liquid modernity which describes society's ability to change to react to risk. Flexibility as a good strategy because it allows for adjustments to be made (Ekberg 354).
References:
Bauman, Zygmunt. Liquid Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2000.
Beck, Ulrich. Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1995.
Beck, Ulrich. World Risk Society. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999.
Ekberg, Merryn. "The Parameters of the Risk Society: A Review and Exploration." Current Sociology 55: 343-366. Web. 21 July 2014.
Giddens, Anthony. The Consequences of Modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990.
Giddens, Anthony. Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1994.