Hi, I am new to these boards and I hope to find a good home here
Recently my friends and I were discussing Whitehead and what we think he means when he uses the term civilized. Our philosophy professor got wind of this and presented us with the following question (he is notorious for wanting to test our mental powers in and out of class):
-Explain how civilization develops from Barbarism. How does the ingression of eternal objects, the power of ideas, and the role of great individuals play into this?
My friends and I came up with what we felt to be a decent answer and his response was for us to get other perspectives on this. What do you guys think? Apparently we are missing something and I am eagerly trying to find what. Thank you so much!
Civilisation/barbarism is one of those typical binary oppositions where the first term is almost invariably taken to be the superior term. Be wary of this one because often the rhetorical ploy of priveleging the former term is overlooked and repeated without critical reflectionâŚ
Through the distribution of economic powers. Civility is a contract made between adherents of a group who possess unequal capacities but equal ideals, which is to say, the difference in ability does not determine the difference in the degree of value and equality- it is the adherence to the ideal and the function toward that ideal that generates diplomacy.
Initially in the primitve conditions where a âcivilizationâ is collected of whatever size, the eloquence of their political and moral ideologies are not yet formed, are not yet indoctrinated, and are not yet encoded. This is because of language. Meanwhile, the settings which generate the governments are strictly economical and materialistic- that is, what morals are active are determined previous to what language will later ascribe as moral theory.
Here it is obvious that the movement from barbarism to civiliation is not inherently dependent on language but rather sociological physical circumstances within the field of work and survival.
Basically one might understand civilization as a kind of expansion of the sex-drive and the will to manipulate the physical instruments of this world to survive and reproduce. As the numbers increase, so too does the intellect to match the environmental and economical expectations for maintaining those larger numbers.
The change from hunter-gatherer to agriculturalist marked the first great modification of politcal ideology. Previous to that, man moved to quickly to expand his numbers at such a rate that he would require settling and creating a language.
I couldnât have said it better myself. However Etigale may not be familiar with binary opposition and privileging terms to reinforce logocentric determinism. So if you donââŹâ˘t mind someoneisatthedoor I think I will try to expand on what you said.
The term Civilization is often used to describe to the scientific, artistic, and cultural attainments of a culture. It is also often used to refer to a basic social order allowing for resolution of differences peaceably. For example when someone says âLetâs act civilized.â With Barbarism the term must always refer to a civilization that has degraded from a superior historical era or a culture which is viewed as inferior by an outside civilization that considers itself superior.
For many modern prominent thinkers critical reflection on this logocentric privileging of terms isnât necessary. Their answer seems to be that certain types of people are by nature incapable of progressing beyond barbarism without aid from more culturally developed groups.
Itâs not hard to find example of our culture privileging our type of civilization over an other to reinforce our model of superiority. Just read Mark Leopoldâs âViolence in contemporary Africaâ published just three months ago. Leopold explains that many of the African cultures today are centered around war and describes these cultures as the âNew Barbarism.â Itâs unfortunate that this type of ignorant thinking still exists even against the back drop of thinkers like LĂŠvi-Strauss and Said.
So I would ask Etigale that before you continue in this inquiry you redefine what you meant when you said ââŹĹExplain how civilization develops from Barbarism?ââŹÂ Once this is done moving this post into the Social Sciences section wouldnââŹâ˘t be a bad idea because an Anthropologist or Sociologist would be better suited to answer your question objectively.
