This blog will be used throughout the quarter for primary document analysis, reflection, and classroom discussions. Remember that your posts can be viewed by anyone with access to the Internet. Please maintain proper decorum and civil discourse.
Sunday, April 5, 2015
Reflection - "Western Civ. Cradle of Learning"
What is the main idea of this editorial? What are the strengths of Bennett's argument? What are the weaknesses of his argument? Do you agree or disagree with Bennett? Why?
The main idea of the editorial centers around the opinion of William J. Bennett, a politician who staunchly supports the celebration of Western Civilization. Mr. Bennett attests that while contributions in the Islamic world certainly hold their own, the potency and sheer breadth of the Western world far surpasses any advances made in other cultures. He argues that the rare cultural and humanistic freedoms enjoyed by those in the Islamic world pale in comparison to those of the West, fully believing that the reason for the West's dynamism and the East's stagnancy is due to liberalism and lack thereof. Bennett further goes on to stress the importance of understanding one's one culture and civilization before delving into the political and cultural landscape of others. Bennett makes several strong points throughout the article, namely the fact that understanding one's own culture leads to fulfillment. Logically, that makes sense to me, but Bennett offers little concrete evidence to support this. Another powerful point that Bennett supplies is the simple idea that the Western world offers more liberties than the Islamic sphere. From a Western perspective, this again is logical; Western women typically hold more power than Muslim women, and rights common in America and other Western nations are not so ubiquitous in the Middle East. One major flaw in Bennett's argument is his lack of solid fact. He attests to the grandeur of the West, but besides the mention of Western scholars and writers at the conclusion of the article, he does not name any specific superiorities or inventions. His blatant ethnocentrism also hinders his argument, for he fiercely attests to the West's strength and strongly defaces the East's weaknesses. In addition, bias in this article is rampant. William Bennett wrote this article less than a year after 9/11, when anger directed at Islam and the Middle East was at an all-time high. Bennett is also a fierce conservative and once-presidential hopeful, which may influence his opinion. Personally, I somewhat agree with Bennett's arguments. While I have a Western bias as well, I do believe that the Western world is, as a whole, stronger than the Islamic world. I do think that schools should teach localized, national history, but in today's ever-changing and diversifying landscape, having a global perspective is more important than ever. Thus, I believe that Bennett's arguments should be taken with a grain of salt, but that some of his points do prove true.
The main idea of the editorial is the switch from global perspectives of study to a much more focused, and nationalistic viewpoint. Bennett's argument is extremely eloquent, and backed up from multiple assertions. However, some of these assertions are rather arrogant, weakening his argument. Additionally, he completely discounts the flaws of the West, including the Holocaust and Stalin's purges. I do not agree with Bennett because his opinion appears rather ethnocentric, and I think that a global approach will be necessary to understand global society. His bias, moreover, is somewhat understandable because of the recent 9/11 attacks and subsequent negative attitude toward Islamic society.
Many of the opinions that Bennett formed come from the state of mind of America in 2002, just several months after the 9/11 attacks. Several times, he compares western civilization to the Islamic civilization. It seems he feels that western civilization has an advantage over Islamic, and provides several of his thoughts as examples to support his ideas. He mentions that the western civilization asks questions and are interested in bettering the nation as a whole, and insists that because the Islamic civilization “does not have a noble heritage of its own” it has nothing to draw on, and therefore shows he believes they are less superior to western civilization.
I think western civilization is one of the important fact of history which can not be ignored in schools but I disagree the fact that Western civilization is superior than the Islamic civilization, because both civilization are way opposite than each other. Being a supporter of Western civilization It will be a pleasure if schools teach that to students but without co paring other civilizations. There are others civilization which are more intresting than Western civilization, I believe that nothing is perfect in this world on the behalf of this I can say every civilization had fault in them and world is made up of different civilization.
The main idea of this editorial is that it is basically the most important thing to learn about western civilization. His strengths are the facts that he states through out this article. his weaknesses are very much his opinion's because the world was not created by western civilization and that he does not say anything bad about the west all he does is state the good. No, I do not agree with him based on my knowledge the west has been responsible for good but also there has been much bad, We have done some pretty terrible things in our history, not dis crediting the good but not glorifying the bad at the same time.
To begin, one must recognize that the author has been a strong conservative his whole life. He worked for as the Secretary of Education for the Reagan administration, so he is well versed in education and the topic discussed in this editorial. In other context, this was shortly after September 11th, 2001, so fear of Islam and Muslims was especially high which may have dramatized his stance of the Islamic world. William Bennett's central argument in this editorial is that Western civilization, as it currently stands, is superior to Islamic civilization. He contests that because of this, the idea that Western Civilization would not be taught in schools is outrageous. In my opinion, Bennett is only partially right. Should Western Civilization be taught in schools? Preferably, yes, but if it does not relate to a student's major and that student does not have the schedule space, then it should not be an absolute requirement. Otherwise, yes. Learning about the history that formed the western world remains very important today. However, I contest that Bennett's reasoning is incorrect. Students should learn about Western Civilization because it leads to the modern day. The supposed inferiority that Bennett states is simply not true. He mentions the "…suffering that characterizes life for so many in the Middle East…" yet offers no examples to support himself. To support the Western World, he states that many authors or artists question values central to the west's way of thinking, yet in a world that is connected globally, many in the Islamic world can access sources that question their ways of thoughts. I would also assert that the "…respect [as] the rare exception…" he mentions for the Islamic world is incorrect, yet neither he nor I have any sources to offer to support our points. To summarize, the largest weakness of Bennett's argument is his lack of factual support while his main premise of teaching Western Civilization in schools is sound.
There are many strong opinions in Bennett’s article. He sees the that the Western Civilization is much stronger and more advanced than the Islamic civilization. I think that he may have written this because it was just after 9/11 and many people beliefs have been swayed against the Islamic civilization due to the attack. Having that said, I still do not agree with his opinions because he doesn’t say why Western Civilization is better he only explains and why Islamic Civilization is worse.
Bennett poses very insightful morals about western civilization and the necessity of its teachings in the new generation. However, I do not believe with all of his points and in fact I think some of them cross the border over to ethnocentrism. I think that it is important to study the development of western civilizations, but I do not agree that it should be idealized above all other cultures. On those lines, I believe that it is paramount to start the teachings of all cultures in the school system and more importantly they should be weighed equally. This is important because I think that there tends to be a slight whitewashing of most sources and research in history. Which brings me to the point of bias. Since Bennett comes from an educator's point of view, he brings out different examples than some other historians might and I think he fails to address his own bias with counterpoint in the article. That said I do wish to acknowledge that this article serves a good purpose for raising awareness in a broad tone for general audiences.
For University of Chicago to alter their Western Civilizations curriculum has caused a bit of a stir. The new curriculum does not include Ancient Greece or Rome. To me, this leaves student unaware about very important influences in history. The author of this editorial discusses how Western Civilizations is one of the most important studies and dominant. To me, this viewpoint leaves out a lot of other major influences in the world. Me personally, I believe that China has greatly influenced the West. A perfect example would be the Silk Road. This long pathintroduced the West to a whole new world. So in essence, the West did not grow on its own. I do disagree with Bennett believe that his viewpoint is very close minded.
The main idea of the editorial centers around the opinion of William J. Bennett, a politician who staunchly supports the celebration of Western Civilization. Mr. Bennett attests that while contributions in the Islamic world certainly hold their own, the potency and sheer breadth of the Western world far surpasses any advances made in other cultures. He argues that the rare cultural and humanistic freedoms enjoyed by those in the Islamic world pale in comparison to those of the West, fully believing that the reason for the West's dynamism and the East's stagnancy is due to liberalism and lack thereof. Bennett further goes on to stress the importance of understanding one's one culture and civilization before delving into the political and cultural landscape of others. Bennett makes several strong points throughout the article, namely the fact that understanding one's own culture leads to fulfillment. Logically, that makes sense to me, but Bennett offers little concrete evidence to support this. Another powerful point that Bennett supplies is the simple idea that the Western world offers more liberties than the Islamic sphere. From a Western perspective, this again is logical; Western women typically hold more power than Muslim women, and rights common in America and other Western nations are not so ubiquitous in the Middle East. One major flaw in Bennett's argument is his lack of solid fact. He attests to the grandeur of the West, but besides the mention of Western scholars and writers at the conclusion of the article, he does not name any specific superiorities or inventions. His blatant ethnocentrism also hinders his argument, for he fiercely attests to the West's strength and strongly defaces the East's weaknesses. In addition, bias in this article is rampant. William Bennett wrote this article less than a year after 9/11, when anger directed at Islam and the Middle East was at an all-time high. Bennett is also a fierce conservative and once-presidential hopeful, which may influence his opinion. Personally, I somewhat agree with Bennett's arguments. While I have a Western bias as well, I do believe that the Western world is, as a whole, stronger than the Islamic world. I do think that schools should teach localized, national history, but in today's ever-changing and diversifying landscape, having a global perspective is more important than ever. Thus, I believe that Bennett's arguments should be taken with a grain of salt, but that some of his points do prove true.
ReplyDeleteThe main idea of the editorial is the switch from global perspectives of study to a much more focused, and nationalistic viewpoint. Bennett's argument is extremely eloquent, and backed up from multiple assertions. However, some of these assertions are rather arrogant, weakening his argument. Additionally, he completely discounts the flaws of the West, including the Holocaust and Stalin's purges. I do not agree with Bennett because his opinion appears rather ethnocentric, and I think that a global approach will be necessary to understand global society. His bias, moreover, is somewhat understandable because of the recent 9/11 attacks and subsequent negative attitude toward Islamic society.
ReplyDeleteMany of the opinions that Bennett formed come from the state of mind of America in 2002, just several months after the 9/11 attacks. Several times, he compares western civilization to the Islamic civilization. It seems he feels that western civilization has an advantage over Islamic, and provides several of his thoughts as examples to support his ideas. He mentions that the western civilization asks questions and are interested in bettering the nation as a whole, and insists that because the Islamic civilization “does not have a noble heritage of its own” it has nothing to draw on, and therefore shows he believes they are less superior to western civilization.
ReplyDeleteI think western civilization is one of the important fact of history which can not be ignored in schools but I disagree the fact that Western civilization is superior than the Islamic civilization, because both civilization are way opposite than each other. Being a supporter of Western civilization It will be a pleasure if schools teach that to students but without co paring other civilizations. There are others civilization which are more intresting than Western civilization, I believe that nothing is perfect in this world on the behalf of this I can say every civilization had fault in them and world is made up of different civilization.
ReplyDeleteThe main idea of this editorial is that it is basically the most important thing to learn about western civilization. His strengths are the facts that he states through out this article. his weaknesses are very much his opinion's because the world was not created by western civilization and that he does not say anything bad about the west all he does is state the good. No, I do not agree with him based on my knowledge the west has been responsible for good but also there has been much bad, We have done some pretty terrible things in our history, not dis crediting the good but not glorifying the bad at the same time.
ReplyDeleteTo begin, one must recognize that the author has been a strong conservative his whole life. He worked for as the Secretary of Education for the Reagan administration, so he is well versed in education and the topic discussed in this editorial. In other context, this was shortly after September 11th, 2001, so fear of Islam and Muslims was especially high which may have dramatized his stance of the Islamic world. William Bennett's central argument in this editorial is that Western civilization, as it currently stands, is superior to Islamic civilization. He contests that because of this, the idea that Western Civilization would not be taught in schools is outrageous. In my opinion, Bennett is only partially right. Should Western Civilization be taught in schools? Preferably, yes, but if it does not relate to a student's major and that student does not have the schedule space, then it should not be an absolute requirement. Otherwise, yes. Learning about the history that formed the western world remains very important today. However, I contest that Bennett's reasoning is incorrect. Students should learn about Western Civilization because it leads to the modern day. The supposed inferiority that Bennett states is simply not true. He mentions the "…suffering that characterizes life for so many in the Middle East…" yet offers no examples to support himself. To support the Western World, he states that many authors or artists question values central to the west's way of thinking, yet in a world that is connected globally, many in the Islamic world can access sources that question their ways of thoughts. I would also assert that the "…respect [as] the rare exception…" he mentions for the Islamic world is incorrect, yet neither he nor I have any sources to offer to support our points. To summarize, the largest weakness of Bennett's argument is his lack of factual support while his main premise of teaching Western Civilization in schools is sound.
ReplyDeleteThere are many strong opinions in Bennett’s article. He sees the that the Western Civilization is much stronger and more advanced than the Islamic civilization. I think that he may have written this because it was just after 9/11 and many people beliefs have been swayed against the Islamic civilization due to the attack. Having that said, I still do not agree with his opinions because he doesn’t say why Western Civilization is better he only explains and why Islamic Civilization is worse.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteBennett poses very insightful morals about western civilization and the necessity of its teachings in the new generation. However, I do not believe with all of his points and in fact I think some of them cross the border over to ethnocentrism. I think that it is important to study the development of western civilizations, but I do not agree that it should be idealized above all other cultures. On those lines, I believe that it is paramount to start the teachings of all cultures in the school system and more importantly they should be weighed equally. This is important because I think that there tends to be a slight whitewashing of most sources and research in history. Which brings me to the point of bias. Since Bennett comes from an educator's point of view, he brings out different examples than some other historians might and I think he fails to address his own bias with counterpoint in the article. That said I do wish to acknowledge that this article serves a good purpose for raising awareness in a broad tone for general audiences.
ReplyDeleteFor University of Chicago to alter their Western Civilizations curriculum has caused a bit of a stir. The new curriculum does not include Ancient Greece or Rome. To me, this leaves student unaware about very important influences in history. The author of this editorial discusses how Western Civilizations is one of the most important studies and dominant. To me, this viewpoint leaves out a lot of other major influences in the world. Me personally, I believe that China has greatly influenced the West. A perfect example would be the Silk Road. This long pathintroduced the West to a whole new world. So in essence, the West did not grow on its own. I do disagree with Bennett believe that his viewpoint is very close minded.
ReplyDelete