There is a lot of discussion about whether the term “civilization” applies to the level modern humanity has reached today. In order to be able to make such a classification, it is necessary to correctly define civilization and modernity. For example, what are the main characteristics that make a civilization a civilization? How is civilization evaluated in the classical and traditional sense? These and similar questions need to be asked first before we reach the correct answer. Otherwise, we would be as mistaken as the mainstream media which generally labels the United States and Russia as “civilizations.”
In the classical sense, there are certain conditions required for the emergence of a civilization. First of all, justice should be the basis of the administration. The power the ruler holds should not be seen as absolute; since on the contrary, the only absolute is justice. The belief that those in power are only there to serve people should be widespread. The ruler should also have a group of wise and experienced consultants to refer to, work alongside and never cease dialogue with for the sake of society. In every sphere, art should come first. The ruler must succeed in gathering the varied segments of their society under a single roof and establish a harmony in which different identities and personalities are not lost. With all these components, it is only possible to speak of a civilization.
When it comes to the definition of “modernism,” we indeed need to determine when the “modern man” was born. Some romantic historians of religion refer to the story of Abel and Cain when making this definition. However, without going that far back, if we adopt a more realistic approach, traditional thinkers in the West especially have made reference to the Age of Enlightenment in Europe, where modernity is said to have been born. The very period’s most characteristic feature is related to the perspective of “Prometheus,” a Titan god of fire used as a philosophical symbol for the relationship between god and humanity and for the concept of progress. According to this understanding, metaphysics is nothing as it is the sole reduction of everything into the framework of physics. Everything needs to be visible and must be recordable. If something can be perceived by the human senses, the idea that it "exists" is dominant. It is a manifestation of a kind of absolute rationalism. In other words, this is rationalism that accepts nothing beyond itself. It is the beginning of the era of positivism.
With the emergence of the Industrial Revolution and a more profit and production-oriented philosophy in the correlations of production, the emergence of modern capitalism is observed. First, the vital need to accumulate capital emerges. In the pre-modern era, this understanding was not considered very acceptable, as the type of human mentioned here is an individualist, viewing everything in terms of their own interests and putting themself first – which is quite the opposite of how people were in pre-modern times. With the idea centering on “interests,” what we call the “modern man” was born. This new type of human inevitably takes on a competitive character instead of being compatible with society. There are extraordinary differences in this modern man's ethics. The human, who was more altruist before, transforms. Losing trust while growing more greedy, the evolution into a self-interested human begins. This evolution brings about the modern age.
In this age, sciences also have their own share amid the new understanding. For example, economics is defined as the art of regulating unlimited human needs in the face of limited natural possibilities. When you make such a definition from the beginning, it is obvious that you will destroy those natural possibilities. By not curbing human needs, you are throwing them before nature. And that animalized type of human exploits nature as much as it can for its own benefit. Consequently, they are no longer part of nature.
However, people in the Medieval Age had an understanding of the unity of existence. That is, man is in harmony with nature, viewing it as a part of themselves. To give an example, in medieval times, woodsmen would wrap the blade and handle of their axe in a cloth while walking through the forest to cut down a tree whose time had come. This understanding is indicative of a "pan-bioism" perspective – a belief that all in nature is one and united. This vision of the world is reflected in many classical and contemporary poems, such as the one by the 17th-century English poet of the metaphysical school, John Dunno:
“No man is an island,
Entire of itself;
Every man is a piece of the continent,
A part of the main.”
It is said that there is no accumulation in the world of animals. For example, a lion eats as much as it hunts and never accumulates more than it needs. We can say that the act of accumulating actually begins to occur in modern humans. To add another dimension to the example of the woodsman, the woodsman cuts down only as much as they need. And not just any tree is cut down, old and rotten wood is preferred. Or, if the woodman needs to provide sustenance, they cut down enough trees to sell. Thus, nature is allowed to regenerate as it was known that the forest can grow back when you cut down some trees but not all of them. Another example can be given with fishing. The number of fish have begun to decline in the world. We may not be able to find fish to eat in 15 to 20 years at this rate. Destructive methods are used in fishing that destroy fish nests and thus ruin ecosystems at the bottom of the sea. This type of hunting is the result of sheer spontaneous thinking. It is the result of thinking only about the product to be obtained and the money to be earned.
In light of all these developments, when comparing modern man and his prior iterations, a transformation in mentality obviously emerges. According to Max Weber, a German thinker whose ideas have profoundly left an impact on the world’s cumulative, common knowledge heritage, this transformation is related to the “Protestant ethic.” Weber says that the consumption variability arose as a result of the Protestant belief that emphasizes less consumption. When you consume less, you start to save, capital accumulation emerges and then a transition toward capitalist production occurs.
Similarly, Weber's determination is seen in the works of late prominent Turkish economist Sabri Ülgener, who concentrated on the relationships between Sufism and production. Ülgener says as a result of the reduction in consumption of the mystical worldview, economic developments in Türkiye have changed. According to him, the understanding of mysticism in the establishment period of the Turkish republic and in the following years prevented capitalist accumulation and economic developments.
This inference based on a cause and effect relationship was adopted by Marxist human historians in the following years. Of course, the distinction between infrastructure and superstructure in the Marxist understanding of economics is reversed here. Because in the Marxist understanding, your production relations determine what you believe. According to Weber et al., the situation is the opposite. According to what you believe, related relationships will emerge over time. Here I agree with both Karl Marx and Weber. While your thoughts do determine your actions, the opposite is also happening. Thus, a cycle occurs here.
From this perspective, I don't know to what extent we can call today’s "sovereign" Western "civilization" a "civilization." It is a classification that completely changes depending on how we define the concept. However, a consumption-centered structure nurtured by brutal modernism in which the definition of a human goes against human characteristics should definitely not be classified as "civilization." Mere progress and physical growth and development cannot be called civilization. It’s true that we have progressed but have we really progressed in human values? I definitely don’t think so, as there can never be a civilization where modern man lives.
