We are in a time period where change is most profound. We live in an age where even the difference between generations, even the age difference, is affected by the intensity of change in different ways. Three or four centuries ago, there was a rhythm in social life that continued for centuries. On the other hand, the traditional social structure matured by accumulation has differed greatly with the effect of today's rapid and abnormal change. In particular, technological development, mass media and the flow of information and culture brought about by the use of social media are among the biggest reasons for this differentiation.
When we look at traditional structures, we can see that there is an intellectual effort that progresses in proportion to social life. Therefore, there is a harmony between the practices of society and the knowledge produced. We have the chance to see this harmony in every field. Be it religious knowledge, natural knowledge, legal and other social studies, they have progressed in parallel with social reality. As we come to today, we witness that this equivalence cannot be achieved. This is one of the main issues today.
The opening of the gap between social reality and intellectual understanding brings with it social issues. The mental transformation that progresses slowly against the rapid change in the practice of social life cannot direct this area. In the last two centuries, the West has largely succeeded in this orientation for themselves. Because social change was not happening as quickly as it is today, it allowed this. For this reason, Western thinkers, who took advantage of the possibilities of sociology, noticed the social change and had the opportunity to direct the direction of this change.
When we evaluate in terms of both the radical change experienced with the French Revolution and the cautious change in England; Intellectual efforts have been able to drive social transformation towards these changes. However, when we look at the last fifty years, especially with the 21st century, this transformation cannot be realized according to the consistency of the change. This global dilemma is being experienced more dramatically in our country.
Being able to see the society and change can make it easier for us to find answers to the questions that arise in our minds. Therefore, when looking at the social issues we face, it is necessary to consider social dynamics, not the established assumptions. It seems unlikely that norms, acceptances, legal texts and intellectual efforts that have failed to meet the pace of change will be a solution to the problems brought about by rapid change.
The main reason why especially the problems experienced by women and young people continue increasingly despite a public sensitivity is the understanding that cannot be responded to the speed of change. Therefore, it is necessary to consider this problem when evaluating the issues. Otherwise, it is inevitable that we will waste our intellectual efforts with discussions over a constituted text, a law clause or an administrative act.
All the solutions produced take place over the problem sitting in the center. Today, we should stop evaluating the victimization posed by women or young people over fictional problems and evaluate them over the problems created by social practice depending on the pace of change. Only in this way can we narrow the gap between intellectual understanding and the speed of social change. For this, we should make use of the possibilities of history as an experience and sociology as an understanding.