What is Civilization?

[Turk]

What is civilization in your opinion?

What is signifying specialities of civilization?

What is west civilization, if there is a west civilization is there an east civilization too? If it is; what is differences between east and west civilizations?

Which sociologists/philosophers divided civilization into two part; east and west?

Thanks for your opinions from now.

[linz]

The West grew from what Plato called 'swollen and inflamed' in Book II of The Republic i. e. It all comes down to the man on the thrown in the palace, and those who toiled to actually make it. The West made 'the vantage point' in pictures, the major and minor scales and all their complications through whimsy and debate, but couldn't figure out how to make these things accessible to the general public, but only the nobles, at least for a long time, until the French Revolution; Where Islam was so concerned with injustice that they built more in severity of principles; In other words, both grew, but differently.

[Turk]

Well, thanks for opininon but i don't want to spoil my questions with religious discussions, i really would like to hear extended informations and thoughts, preferably with references, thanks.

[cows]

From Merriam Webster:

Civilization:

"1 a : a relatively high level of cultural and technological development; specifically : the stage of cultural development at which writing and the keeping of written records is attained" (www.m-w.com/dictionary/civilization)

Fairly straightforward. Opinion is not what you are asking for.

The terms 'eastern' and 'western' civilization are used to describe certain norms and social structures that grew independently from each other, and later (when they clashed) grew further away.

I have to point out a major misconception that you seem to have. You said that you don't want to ruin this inquiry with religious discussion, but it is a question of religion. Religion is probably the biggest separation between eastern and western society, as it spawned the philosophical differences. I won't discuss them because of your wish, but just understand that ignoring this will never lead you to a full answer.

Also, these questions fall into Anthropology and Sociology more than Philosophy. Philosophers have been divided into eastern and western classifications because their influences have been drastically different. It truly is a matter of separate civilizations developing without communication that spawned the terms.

Reading into Anthropology would help you. I suggest Structural Anthropology by Claude Levi-Strauss if you have some prior knowledge.

[Turk]

I didn't say i don't want to hear opinions, but if you insist i don't want to hear opinions, then let's say i don't want to hear personal opinions which has no basis, opinions with answering questions "why?" and "how?" are ok. I think my questions are quite clear and i would like to hear answers, also religion is ok to talk about when explaining a civilization; the thing i wouldn't like is comparing or making arguable comments about religions here.

Also since you expanded the subject i have a specific question; should Japan considered as eastern or western?

[Turk]

Reading into Anthropology would help you. I suggest Structural Anthropology by Claude Levi-Strauss if you have some prior knowledge.

I will look to find that book but what's the relation of civilization with anthropology?

[cows]

Also from Merriam Webster:

"1 : the science of human beings; especially : the study of human beings and their ancestors through time and space and in relation to physical character, environmental and social relations, and culture

2 : theology dealing with the origin, nature, and destiny of human beings"


So a mix of anthropology/sociology (especially now that anthropologists have been mixing more with sociology and social history) is pretty much your only source of this answer. Along with just plain old history.

[troubadour]

Dear All,

My favourite definition comes from Spengler's 'Decline of the West.' I say favourite but I think it might be the only one I've really ever come across, certainly properly read, apart from theories of society by Marx et al (do we include society in civilisation or the other way around?).

As far as I remember it, Spengler defines civilisation according to the cycle or the rise and fall of cultures in history. He thinks that history is cyclical (as the Greeks did) not a linear progression (in the way that we generally think of when we think of history).

Civilisation, for him is the crystallization of all the currents of the Spirit form of culture which, perhaps like flower which takes a millennia to bloom is gradually frozen at its fullest height by an unbidden frost and finally shatters back to earth. Only to arise again somewhere else, under different influences, in a different form (different artistic, social, religious forms, etc).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Decline_of_the_West is a good overview, but the book itself is a fascinating read. Spengler was one of what feels like a now defunct breed of the highly educated and knowledgeable yet original thinkers who really thought history (not just pretended to report it) to life and who's knowledge of the various historical forms of culture is remarkable. I recommend the abridged version (try http://www.abebooks.com/). One of the most fascinating books one can read, IMO.




Troubadour

[cows]

Also since you expanded the subject i have a specific question; should Japan considered as eastern or western?

Well, Japanese culture is going through some serious changes. Their part in the technology industry has brought westernization, but more specifically and more recently Americanization (a friend once said that they seem more American than Americans, which I found funny).

I would say that Japan is of mainly eastern influence, as Buddhism has been the main religion, but has seen a change in norms over the past 20 or so years. From what I know (my girlfriend's aunt is from Japan and I have asked her about their current social status) many of the roles remain the same. Their eastern traditions are still a large part of Japanese life.

[Taliesin]

We support mainly the Huntington theory - that now there are a number of civilisations, not just the East and West, hmm, if we remember correctly: West, Islamic, Eastern Christianity or Slavic, Japanese, Chinese, Buddhist, Hindustani, Southern American, African cover pretty much the most areas. (there were some countries and places that belonged to none, like for example some indigenous Siberian people)
Huntington views religion as what mainly defines a civilisation and that different civilisation have different systems of values which makes communication between civilisations harder than communicating with someone from your own civilisation.

[applepie]

What is civilization in your opinion?
Civilization is the grouping of people to form a complex society in which there is a defined hierarchy that helps to dictate how the society will function in regards to the solving of problems. This hierarchy may not always be easily detected, but it is there. By my definition, civilization can be found in almost any species not just homo sapien. Though we choose to believe it is a trademark of being human, civilization can be found amongst many species such as wolves and chimpanzees.
What is signifying specialities of civilization?
The main specialty is the ability to work as a unit. When you reach the status of a civilization you are working for the greater good of the unit, not just the individual. It enables the elderly and weak to survive when by the natural laws of selection they shouldn't. It also makes possible the inquisitiveness that we ourselves exhibit. The main benefit from civilization is our ability to look beyond survival and question the world around us.
What is west civilization, if there is a west civilization is there an east civilization too? If it is; what is differences between east and west civilizations?
There is an east and west civilization, but I don't believe it is really a different civilization. more it is a difference in philosophy. There is a difference in viewing the world in regards to our perception of time and the meaning of life. It also poses a difference in our religious beliefs and our views of family and the traditional roles that the members of a family fit into. It could mean the difference in patriarchat and matriarchal societies and it also may influence what is deems most important in life.

Which sociologists/philosophers divided civilization into two part; east and west? I would say people who are trying to determine if one way of life and philosophy is better than another. I figure recorded sociology is much like recorded history. It is determined by the winners of wars who naturally feel superior to the loosers.

[Unbeliever]

To me, "civilization" refers to our ability and willingness to overcome our natural tendencies toward aggression, such that we can make the world what we want it to be, rather than what it is naturally - a place of death and misery. The world has always been "red in tooth and claw," but we've been able to mitigate that circumstance somewhat by learning how to live with each other without killing everyone we consider to be any kind of threat to us. We've got a long way to go, however.

[Midas]

Civilisation, it appears, refers to an accepted standard of behaviour by a community influenced by its common beliefs, within a level commensurate with the advances, and changes brought by the maturity of knowledge and technology.

It is definitely subjective, both to that community as a whole which by its majority rule would define that standard, but it may also differ within the individual members, as we do not all see things the same way.

For example, our/your society may believe itself civilised compared with another, yet that other society could well point out our deficiencies by which they would judge us differently.

The imposing of ones standards, and values, on another is the cause of the many serious problems with which we are suffering at present.

When introducing such a thread, to my mind, it is wrong to discount different opinions of the broad spectrum of readers, unless one is only seeking that which has been determined by media, or academia. In which case, the question need not be posed on a public forum - just digest the consensus of media, and academia's accepted books.

Civilisations are merely a collection of individuals, and while the masses often appear to have a sheep like behaviour from their brainwashing imposed by their nature and nurture, there are many who have evolved with independent thought, and action. It is this element that has spawned most of our great thinkers, and writers, but they existed long before they were recognised as such. It may well be that some future exalted member may be maturing while surfing such a forum as this.

Of course, just my humble 'opinion'.
Midas

[quasimodo1]

The budget should be balanced, the treasury refilled, public debt reduced, the arrogance of officialdom tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands curtailed, lest Rome become bankrupt. - Quintus Tullius Cicero