A critical appreciation of Russell's views on Western Civilization .
In this essay, various aspects of viewing the civilization are discussed in detail. The
question is what Western civilization is. Is Western civilization special or even unique in
world History? Does it contain recognizable noteworthy characteristics? Is Western culture
withering away? How it has changed over tie? !ivilization can be defined as an advanced
state of a society possessing historical and cultural unity. This essay deals with the
identification of specific societies, because of their distinctive achieveents. "ecause of 
these achieveents, historians have regarded the as separate civilizations. Historical
 perspective used in viewing a civilization is a significant unit of relatively recent origin.
"efore this, a country was studied in viewing a civilization. Throughout iddle #ges,
$uropean historians viewed the civilization in religious perspective. They regarded the
!hristian revelation as the ost oentous event in history. They viewed all history as
either the prelude to or afterath of that event. The early historians did not study deeply the
other cultures e%cept the religious field. In early &'The!entury, the national viewpoint arose. It
 based largely on political philosophy of (achiavelli. He said that the proper ob)ect of 
historical study was state. Historians becae interested in other cultures during the #ge
of $nlightenent. They developed a secular viewpoint in &*thecentury. The +rench
 philosopher oltaire used principles of rational criticis in viewing beyond the
 provincialis of earlier historical thin-ing. However, his attepts of universal history
suffered fro his own biases. In early &the!entury, /oantic (oveent arose and
 philosophers and historians criticized on the &*the!entury idea that people were the sae
everywhere at all ties. The 0eran philosophers 1ohann on Herder and 0eorge
Wilhel +riedrich Hegel ephasized that there were profound differences in the inds
and wor-s of huan2s indifferent cultures. #ccording to odern historians of 
civilizations, it is ipossible to write fully understandable history of any nation without
ta-ing in consideration the types of culture to which it belongs. They state that any
distinctive characteristics are the base of life of a nation or state. The country consists of a
larger social entity, and this entity is cultural rather political. In odern ties, the
e%isting civilizations have effects ore and ore on one another that no one civilization
is achieving a separate destiny anyore and all ay be considered participants in a
coon world civilization. 3oe historians see stri-ing uniforities in the histories of 
civilizations. The 0eran philosopher 4swald 3pengler described civilizations as living
 
2
historian #rnold Toynbee is not so rigid deterinist as 3pengler is and points out a
unifor pattern in the history of civilizations. #ccording to Toynbee, a civilization ay
 prolong its life indefinitely by successful responses to the various internal and e%ternal
challenges. (any historians are s-eptical of philosophies of history derived fro an
alleged pattern of the past. They are reluctant to base predictions about the future on such
theories. (any historians studied the civilizations on personal biases. In ancient ties,
Herodotus studied any cultures but found his own Western 0ree- culture superior to all
others. Western !ivilization ebraces 5orth and 3outh #erica and $urope e%cluding
/ussia and the "ritish 3elf6governing doinions. In this civilization, the
7.8nited 3tates is leading the all other countries. #ll the characteristics that distinguish
the West fro the $ast are ost ar-ed and developed in #erica. We are accustoed to ta-e
 progress for granted9 to assue without hesitation that the changes, which have happened
during the last hundred years, were for the better, and that further changes for the better are
sure to follow indefinitely. The great wars have ade a blow to this concept and en have begun
to loo- bac- the tie before &&: as a golden age. However, the countries li-e !hina
have ade uch progress without changing its culture. It is as the sae as a hundred and fifty
years before. The civilization of !hina is based on the teachings of !onfucius. ;i-e the
0ree-s and /oans, he did not thin- of huan society as naturally progressive. He
 believed that in old ages, rulers had been wise, and the people had been happy to a
degree, which the degenerate present could adire but hardly achieve. !onfucius aied
to creating as table society, aintaining a certain level of e%cellence, but he did not strive
after new successes. His personality has been staped on !hinese !ivilization fro his
day to our own. The !onfucian syste survived, bringing with it art and literature and civilized ways
of life. It is only in our own day, through contact with the West and the westernized
1apanese that this syste has begun to brea-.