Eurocentrism Essay

Eurocentrism tramp be specify as the liking that the Roman and Grecian cultures gave filch to the modern effusion of desires and learning. Within this idea is contained the notion that the origins of classic culture lie hard-and-fastly in spite of appearance the borders of what is originally considered Western Europe, making the ancestors of Western Europeans responsible for all in all the progress of the modern world (Dussel, 465). This idea is considered by modern historians to be false and base not on accompanimentual accounts but sort of on the distortion of history by colonizers (Blaut, 10).This distortion of history is based on the Inside-Outside or Center-Periphery models of subtlety which pinpoint an bea of the world as the peak of elaboration, and the areas outside of it as barbaric. This model depicts Greater Europe as the insider area which contained the civilized culture, and it posits a gradual diffusion of that culture to the new(prenominal) articul ations of the world surrounding it. Yet this model presents an erroneous go out of the worlds process of elaboration. The ideas that are based on the models in a higher place tend to identify Europe on the one hand as being civilized and making strides in scientific and technological advancement.On the other hand, this view places the world outside of Europe in a position of stagnancy, with k straightwayledge remaining static unless ideas were learned from Europe. This idea similarly gives rise to an ethnocentric idea of European intellectualism as being the reason for the centralization of knowledge within that area. It also gives rise to the antipathetic idea of non-West European culture as necessarily consisting of inferior ideas which might be described as savage, atavistic, uncivilized and evil (Blaut, 16).The truth is very different, however, as the Greek and Roman cultures that contributed to the civilization of Europe must give attribution for its ideas to a wide array of cultural influences whose origins span areas as removed as Africa and Asia (Dussel, 465-468). fit in to Dussel, Europe cannot claim Greece as a part of its earliest origins. Furthermore, during the height of Greek cultural dominance, awareness existed in the Greek world of the progressive nature of the Egyptian (African) and Turkish ( Asiatic) civilizations (Dussel, 465 Yurco, 1).Yet, while this Greek snapper civilization was aware of the existence of civilized Africans and Asians, their knowledge of what is now Modern Europe was minimal and the area considered to be populated by the uncivilized, the non-political and the non-human (465). The idea that Greece bequeathed civilization to Rome and to Europe is false. Rather, a dichotomy existed in the midst of the Latin (West) and Greek ( tocopherol) cultures, and this configuration did not include a strict conception of Europe. The Greek culture was dominated in classical multiplication as much by the Arab (Muslim) culture as it was by the knotted (Christian) culture.Therefore, the Aristotelian basis of civilization was historically strongly connected to the meat Eastern and as yet Asian (Turk) civilizations (466). What actually occurred to lead to the development of civilization in Europe is based on an interplay of cultures from all over the continents of Africa and Eurasia. much(prenominal) thinkers as Thomas doubting Thomas and Albertus Magnus relied heavily on the ideas that came from the Turkish-derived Aristotelian ideas (Dussel, 466). The ideas generated by Aristotle were actually studied in what is now modern-day Iraq (Baghdad) before Aquinas became exposed to them.Indeed, Aquinas exposure came still afterwards the Muslims in Spain translated these workings into the Latin vernacular. The arrival of these works in Paris during the late 1100s B. C. attach the initial period in which differentiation occurs between Europe and Africa/Asia (466). The Crusades, which followed during this era, accordingly may be seen as the first attempt do by Europe to dumbfound dominant in the newly differentiated territories of Africa and the Eastand these campaigns might be considered failures (466). Europocentric ideas concerning the Old World can thusly be seen to be a myth based on the colonially drive histories that have been passed down in the recent past. The failure of the Crusades might be seen as a way in which Europe itself was kept out of the civilization encompassed by the Turkish and Muslim regions, which spread their dominance from Morocco to India and even to the Philippine island of Mindanao. Even the Roman Empire, which dominated Europe for centuries, never penetrated to become the center of civilization in the African and Asian worlds (Dussel, 466).Before this measure, the only empire that came close to being dominant and of Eurasian origin are the Hellenistic empires. Yet these empires are not one and the same as Europe, and never gained as large a dominance as the Muslims had after them (467). In contrast to the Eurocentric model of civilization is the strong Turkish (Muslim) civilizationhistorically represented by the term Asia (Blaut, 20). This area, which later became cognize as the Ottoman Empire, was dominant within its region.It even began conquering rule into south-eastern Europe, and this idea falsifies the theory of all civilization issuing from Europe. Even in the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries, European presence in the African and Asian continents was merely a matter of trade rather than dominance. The idea of a Eurocentric world actually found root only during the 19th century when colonization occurred in areas of the Old World (India, Asia, African and China). During this period, the motley Greek culture was adopted and re-classified as European.The Greek culture is and then identified with that of the Romans and then the two are placed at the center of the worlds historical civilization. It is at this point that Euro pe is able-bodied to emerge as the worlds intellectual benefactor. However, the fact that at this point no united world history existed and their location made it impossible for them to be central in providing for the surrounding territories an impetus toward civilization (468). Colonization in the nineteenth century can be seen as the chief mechanism through which Eurocentrism has been able to become dominant in global thinking.In order to maintain the colonial thrust, European colonizers were prompted to stimulate ideologies that support the dominance that European countries had gained in their obeisanceive colonies. Religious, hearty, and scientific ideas that were spawned during that time gave rise to the Eurocentric ideas that are extant even in modernity. According to Blaut, A Christian missionary might have with child(p) love and respect for the people among whom he or she worked, but could not be anticipate to believe that the culture and mind of these non-Christians w as on par with that of Christian Europeans (24).The social and legal theories being fashioned at the time were created by those who were in charge of making the policies that the theories should support. Therefore, intellectual history became biased in its anticipation regarding the comparative worth of the cultures that stand alongside the European culture. However, in the disciplines of economic science and anthropology ideas and truths were discovered which did not fit well with the tendency toward Eurocentrism.Such ideas as equilibrium and stasis developed in Keynesian economics. In geography, stasis was found to be a natural occurrence in regionalism. Theories of equilibrium and stability were bodied in such anthropological ideas as functionalism, while cultural relativism state in essence that each culture has built-in worth (Blaut, 27). However, within the discipline of Anthropology, political motives can be found for publicizing the fact of cultural relativism, though t empered with a Eurocentric overtone.The notion of the intrinsic worth of the culture would have the effect of discouraging unrest, while the Eurocentric overtones would have the complementary effect of evoking gratitude in the heart of the colonists toward the colonizers (27). Overall, however, colonial indoctrination has been characterized by a teleological view of the Wests advancement, which is responsible for the benefits accorded Latin American, Asian, and African nations. Many other cultures outside of Europe experienced great progress and civilization throughout history.Yet, the result of inattention to the civilization perspective of Europe and other regions at other time periods has given rise to contemporary confusion surrounding these cultures. One such problem can be found in the misunderstood racial composition of Egyptians. In fact, the analysis of the racial composition of the Egyptian royalty gives credence to the idea that multiculturalism existed in the Egyptian c ivilizations of the past. Peoples from lands traditionally connected with Europe became traders and settlers in Egyptand this underscores the centrality of this civilization during the ancient times.Such centrality naturally rebuts the idea behind Eurocentrism. However, the fact that crossing led to the Europeanized features of many of the Egyptian drawings and mummies has helped fuel the myth that European cultures contend all the dominant roles in the civilizations of the past (Yurco, 2). Eurocentrism involves the idea that civilization was generated from a European center and somehow diffused to the other areas of the world. This idea finds its force play in the recent dominance that Europeans have had in the several continents of the world.Colonialism needed justification, and the method by which this was done involved the creation of ideas and systems that placed Europeans at the forefront of history. It involved the Europeanization of the Greek cultures and the oversimplif ication of the factors leading up to the current socio-political state of the world. Furthermore, the fact that world history has been written down and propagated chiefly during the period European dominance has facilitated the Eurocentrism that can now be seen in the historical understanding of the world.