NationStates Jolt Archive

Perusing through my old computer game manuals (yes, I know. But they can be fun to read--Homeworld and AOE2 especially) I rediscovered the following (slightly adapted) from the Civilization III manual.

The Five Impulses of Civilization

1. Knowledge
-The driving force behind science, learning, and the arts. The desire and will to progress and advance.
2. Conquest
-The idea of expanding territory and spreading knowledge and culture through warfare and diplomatic might.
3. Technology
-The necessary changes a civilization develops in order to better adapt to, and shape, the surrounding environment.
4. Economics
-System used to illustrate and show wealth and prosperity; visible evidence of a developed society.
5. Culture
-Combination of religion, art, and architecture, as well as social and economic groups defined through marked understanding and unity under a single or group of related ideals and thoughts.

What defines a civilization? What are its hallmarks? Does such a thing as "developed" actually exist, or is it relative? If a society is technologically driven and advanced but lacks comparative moral standards, is it more civilized than a society that does not match the technological prowess of the first country but places greater value on morality and ethics? Are there different levels of civilization, or just different kinds? How are they delineated? I'm sure there are many, many more questions that stem from defining civilization. I also recently read Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs and Steel and his recent Collapse, as well as Clash of Civilizations by Samuel Huntington. And it has me thinking, which is always dangerous, what does the greater body of NS think?

civilization only needs farming to exist and even that’s pushing it

The rest comes naturally as human history tends to show

edit: and as for your question yes the more advanced civilization is more civilized but only because its thrown away the shackles of morals

civilization only needs farming to exist and even that’s pushing it

The rest comes naturally as human history tends to show

edit: and as for your question yes the more advanced civilization is more civilized but only because its thrown away the shackles of morals

Is it though? It is more civilized to disregard respect for others at the expense of furthering scientific progress? Morality extends beyond that espoused by anti-abortionists and those who see homosexuality as a purely immoral act. Morality, and more broadly, ethics, describes the relationship between man (used in the generic term denoting mankind) and all that his actions impact.

Is it though? It is more civilized to disregard respect for others at the expense of furthering scientific progress?

no its more civilized to realise right and wrong don’t exist

Morality extends beyond that espoused by anti-abortionists and those who see homosexuality as a purely immoral act.

Yes it also covers the logic my dog can understand that being not looking at why but merely following a pre-set way of thinking

I readed Guns, Germs and Steel too, and its my favorite non-fiction book.

In my opinion, knowledge is the biggest power anyone can gather. You need to know how to work a gun to use it. You need to know how to drive a car to use it. You need to know how to run a company to make it profitable and powerfull enough.

That is why I consider culture the biggest asset of any civilization. Culture is the informal knowledge taught to each new generation. In this knowledge, you´re suposed to learn how to act, how to behave, how to develop, how to become stronger and more competent in your daily life.

A civilization´s culture is important because, just as I´ve said, its suposed to be the "free" knowledge any citizen gets while he is growing. And this knowledge is not related to formal knowledge like math, sciences and human knowledge, but behavior like knowledge.

For example, in the US, AFAIK, there is a huge competitive feeling inside its culture. There are competitions for everything. Individuality is encouraged and people are suposed to be good at something and get profit out of it. Those that cant are "losers" and are disrespected by society.

In the other hand, you have the japanese, who had a culture that suports groups. People are suport to work for the whole, to put their best effort to suport everyone around them and make the group grow together.

Those are two very distinct ways of dealing with reality and developing one´s own society. Now, if you get a diferent culture, lets say a culture of an African undeveloped country, the idea of how the world works that these people have is very diferent, and it shows in the way they deal with the world. While in the US and Japan democracy is encouraged, in some African countries, the only respect someone gets is through strengh and guns.

The value of culture and knowledge becomes even more evident when you see countries like Iraq and Afeganistan, where the concept of nationalization, that is totaly developed in countries like the US and Japan in almost non-existant in these other countries. If in the US and Japan most, if not all of its citizens believe and work toward the development of their COUNTRY, in Iraq many people dont even know the concept of nation. They believe only in the power of their clan, or village, or ideology. They dont have the concept of a greater nation, something that is culturaly created and transmitted from one generation to another. They dont share the same culture, like all Japanese or all Americans share.

And that is why democracy cant work in Iraq, unless at gunpoint. The citizens of Iraq dont have the concept of nationalism in their minds. They are still strugling like Europe was in the middle ages, with clans and a feudalism society. Trying to enforce democracy, a very recent idea (not 200 years ago) in Europe and America into Iraq is like trying to teach a baby how to jump without teaching him how to walk.

So, culture, for me, is the most important asset in any country or civilization. If a civilization was like a human, culture would be the knowledge of this individual. Just like a human has to learn how to walk before being able to run, a nation has to learn some ideas before being able to implement others. And that is why some nations on the earthy are like old wise man (Norway, Sweden, Japan etc), there are some others who are like todlers (Serra Leoa, Congo etc).

What defines a civilization? What are its hallmarks?

cities, monumental architecture, and division of labor

It used to be that a "civilization" was, by definition, a culture with writing. The definition has broadened a bit in the past few decades to include some non-literate cultures that have such features as permanent cities and legal codes (lots of cultures have orally transmitted legal codes; writing isn't necessarily a prerequisite.)

It may not be possible to draw a firm, absolute line between "civilized" and "uncivilized". But here's a list of features that contribute to one's level of civilization: permanently inhabited settlements, a government structure, a code of laws, a written language, division of labor, a money economy, public works such as temples and theatres, irrigation systems, a standing army - and probably a whole lot more. You don't necessarily have to have all of these things to be "civilized", but you probably need a majority of them.