From: cutchin@cs.purdue.EDU (Steve Cutchin)
Newsgroups: soc.history
Subject: Re: World Culture and Western Culture
Date: 6 Oct 92 00:00:51 GMT
	<JMC.92Sep28214354@SAIL.Stanford.EDU> <19764@ector.cs.purdue.edu>
	<1992Oct1.224600.17393@nntp.hut.fi>
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Purdue University

In article <1992Oct1.224600.17393@nntp.hut.fi> c34657b@saha.hut.fi (Tuomas Viljanen) writes:

>In article <19764@ector.cs.purdue.edu> cutchin@cs.purdue.edu (Steve Cutchin) writes:
>>    tendencies  as abberations.  Let me make a list of some of the more
>>    negative creations of Western Culture:

>Mr. Cutchin tries to convince the following examples are proofs of the
>evilness and moral inferiority of the "Western" civilization (i.e.
>"only the Western Civ can produce such horrendous consequences").
>However, all these can be proven faulty, as

   I was in no way attempting to show the inferiority of "western culture".
   I was responding to Mr. McCarthy's posting that used the same argument
   as mine to prove the 'superiority' of "western culture".  He listed things
   he liked about the west and then concluded that since the west created
   such good things it is superior to all others.  I did the same, listed
   things created by the west and therefore concluded that the west was
   'inferior'.  My point being to show the invalidity of such an argument.

   However:

>>    1.  Nuclear Warfare.
> Nuclear warfare is not a product of the Western civilization alone; it is the
>by-product of the nuclear technology. No matter who would have discovered the
>nuclear fission he had surely made nuclear weapons. People are similar every-
>where; when mankind discovered iron, it immediately began to forge swords. If
>the Chinese had discovered tthe nuclear fission, they surely would have immed-
>iately began to build atomic bombs. No need for Western depravity for this.

   Can you name one other country other than the USA that has actually used
   a nuclear weapon in a military conflict?

   Ahh, thought not.  As such the west has the first and foremost claim to
   Nuclear Warfare as its own personal cultural phenomenon.  We could make
   that even more specific and say the USA is the only culture that can 
   claim actual Nuclear warfare.

>>2.  Capitalism (yes Mr McCarthy this has negative aspects).
>Capitalism is the worst economical system available - sans all those alternat-
>ive systems tested, like Communism etc. And more efficient economical system
>will always push less efficient system aside -an example of cultural evolution
>Again, no Western depravity needed for this.

   Please define 'worst', and 'efficient'.  

>>3.  World Wars I and II.
>Oh dear. Is the Western civilization the only civilization on this globe which
>wage wars? Wars are an universal phenomenon, by no means an indigenous Western
>phenomenon.WWII was, in fact, began in the Far East, where Japan practised her
>expansionist, aggressive military policy on China for several years before the
>outbreak of war in West. The sneak attack to Pearl Harbor finally turned the
>Great Powers' War into the Second World War.

   Nope, the west is obviously not the only culture to wage wars.  However
   prior to the advent of 'modern western technology' and 'modern western
   government' wars of such large scale and destruction had not been fought
   before.  Thats part of the reasons they were called world wars.  My use
   of quotes around the two phrases is to be certain to show that modern 
   technology and modern government are not necessarily simply products of
   the west handed out to other cultures.  They may not even be products
   of the west.  However if one grants these assumptions then it can be
   argued as I have that because of these 'western' developments the
   west is 'inferior' to other cultures.  In stark contrast to Mr. McCarthy's
   use of the same phrases to show the 'superiority' of the west via the
   same argument.

>>    6.  The Holocaust.
>
>The Westerners are, in fact, pure novices in the noble art of genocide. The
>largest body count I have yet heard comes from the Mongol China conquest,where
>the Mongols managed to slaughter some 120 MILLION Chinese during their reign.
>I have heard they had a plan to turn the whole china into steppes to feedtheir
>horses. Pity they did not succeed, the Prezwalski horse would have survived...

    Uh, as someone has posted your facts are a bit off here.

>Might makes right, man ! Haven't you learned it yet ? I would suggest for
>reading Sun Tzu, Macchiavelli, Clausewitz or other classics. It does not
>make any difference whether the civilization is Eastern or Western, people
>are similar everywhere. If, say, the Chinese had first reached the state
>of technology and civilization the Europeans were from 1600 onwards, they
>certainly would have behaved just like the Westerners did. The strongest
>is always right, this is a cold reality.

    No, the strongest is always strongest.  This is the cold reality.

>The Mayas managed to build up themselves a very own ecological disaster in
>the Yucatan Peninsula, just without the aid of "progressed" technology. The
>progress itself does not cause ecological problems: it is the application
>of the progress. Progressed technology can be also used for environmental
>protection in much more efficient ways than non-progressed technology.

    Why is it that when a creation of one culture does good it is an
    'achievement' brought abought by the inherent 'goodness' of that
    creation and when it does bad it is either an abberation or a
    misuse of the creation?  Why isn't the benefit the abberation and the
    negative aspects the normality?  'Progress' in and of itself is
    neither good nor bad.  Therefore I can not claim my culture is 'superior'
    to yours simply because I understand 'Progress'.  If I even want to
    begin to claim superiority I have to first define 'superior' and show
    that some cultural aspect like 'progress' has provided more benefit
    then harm.  Good luck trying to do that.

>I would rather live in the modern high-tech socitey, than in, say, the

   Thats nice for you.

>medieval India or China, in which the progress had stagnated for centuries,
>even for millenniums. A dynamic, progressing civilization is more pleasant
>place to live in than the static, stagnated civilizations.

    Well, first we should define 'progress' then give some reasons why
    it is inherently more pleasant to live in such a society.  Note, 
    "because I like it" is not a sufficient reason to conclude the cultural
    superiority of a 'progressive' society versus a 'non-progressive' 
    society.

    None of these arguements are actually even relevant to what the real
    discussion is.  Which is by what criteria can I determine the
    'superiority' of one culture over another?  Can I even do so?  What
    does 'superiority' mean.  My original posting was simply meant to
    point out that listing things you like or dislike within in a culture
    does not allow you to conclude it is inherently superior.  At least
    not until you define 'superior'



>++ Tuomas Viljanen                     ++ For a battle like Crecy, you do  ++
>++ Lahderanta 20 A 19                  ++ not need a military genius like  ++
>++ SF-02720 Espoo 72 FINLAND           ++ Edward III. All you need is an   ++
>++ 358-0-592175 or c34657b@saha.hut.fi ++ idiot like the Duke of Alencon.  ++


----
Steve Cutchin
cutchin@cs.purdue.edu