The Idea of Civilization
“The Idea of Civilization” and “The Idea of Civilization in World Historical Perspective” Comparative Essay
Civilizations are crucial to the growth of humanity and the history behind it, and understanding them can sometimes be difficult. Many historians have been studying this topic for years on end and have produced contrasting opinions and aspects. Examples of this show up in these two articles in particular, both with very distinct, unique ideas whilst seeing eye to eye in a handful of ways.
Both articles agree that the idea of a civilization is more mental thing than a physical thing, that their complexities are more social and cultural. Civilizations cannot simply be defined as a town, city, or location. They are the social behaviors and ideals of a way of life, which both articles fully acknowledge. The Chinese believed that the act of being civilized was cultural, not biological or racial. The Europeans and the Chinese suggest that ridding civilizations of human culture would take it out of their right perspective. In civilizations, hierarchies are used to rank or socially lessen people, even going as far as of calling them inferior or even barbaric. Kishlansky, Geary, O’Brien, and Wong state that civilization and social rankings were used to contrast the European society and culture with what the British saw as the chaotic barbarity of the new world. In the second article, “barbarians” (translated as ‘”those who cannot speak Greek”) is the term used by the Greeks to describe anyone who did not speak their language.
As we look further into the idea of civilization, a few points or notions come out different between the two articles. In “The Idea of Civilization”, the word civilization originated from an ancient Greek term for “those who reside in a particular place, its citizens”. In “The Idea of Civilization in World Historical Perspective”, authors Stearns, Adas, and Schwartz write that the same word comes from the Latin word civilis, which
Civilizations are crucial to the growth of humanity and the history behind it, and understanding them can sometimes be difficult. Many historians have been studying this topic for years on end and have produced contrasting opinions and aspects. Examples of this show up in these two articles in particular, both with very distinct, unique ideas whilst seeing eye to eye in a handful of ways.
Both articles agree that the idea of a civilization is more mental thing than a physical thing, that their complexities are more social and cultural. Civilizations cannot simply be defined as a town, city, or location. They are the social behaviors and ideals of a way of life, which both articles fully acknowledge. The Chinese believed that the act of being civilized was cultural, not biological or racial. The Europeans and the Chinese suggest that ridding civilizations of human culture would take it out of their right perspective. In civilizations, hierarchies are used to rank or socially lessen people, even going as far as of calling them inferior or even barbaric. Kishlansky, Geary, O’Brien, and Wong state that civilization and social rankings were used to contrast the European society and culture with what the British saw as the chaotic barbarity of the new world. In the second article, “barbarians” (translated as ‘”those who cannot speak Greek”) is the term used by the Greeks to describe anyone who did not speak their language.
As we look further into the idea of civilization, a few points or notions come out different between the two articles. In “The Idea of Civilization”, the word civilization originated from an ancient Greek term for “those who reside in a particular place, its citizens”. In “The Idea of Civilization in World Historical Perspective”, authors Stearns, Adas, and Schwartz write that the same word comes from the Latin word civilis, which