Study your flashcards anywhere!

Download the official Cram app for free >

  • Shuffle
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Alphabetize
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Front First
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Both Sides
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off
  • Read
    Toggle On
    Toggle Off

How to study your flashcards.

Right/Left arrow keys: Navigate between flashcards.right arrow keyleft arrow key

Up/Down arrow keys: Flip the card between the front and back.down keyup key

H key: Show hint (3rd side).h key

A key: Read text to speech.a key


Play button


Play button




Click to flip

11 Cards in this Set

  • Front
  • Back
How did the Concept of "civilization" change in the 17th and 18th centuries?
-Efforts were made to define the differences between civilized & barbarian, and identify a series of stages in human development
-Modes of human social organization and cultural expression were increasingly linked to the inate capacities of each human race.
What was the connection between this "new" view of civilization and imperialistic expansion?
There are still more powerful ethnicities/civilizations that rule over those "barbaric" ethnicities/civilizations & the europeans were given a motive to conquer.
What is the meaning of imperialism?
Spreading of empire
What is the meaning of ethonocentrism?
Favor towards a certain ethnicity
Why did the meaning of civilization undergo change in the 20th century?
-Racist thinking was discredited by 20th century developments including the revolt of the colonized peoples & the crimes preformed by the Nazis in the name of racial purification
-Racial supreamists cannot provide convincing proof of innate differences and mantal & physical aptitude between the races
-Reserch that has resulted in a much more sophisitcated understanding of evolution.
What are the three classical civilizations?
India, China, Greco-Romainia
What did the three classical civilizations have in common?
They developed empires, relied primarily on an agricultural economy, emphasized a high social heiarchy (W/ a substancial distance between elites & the majority of the people who did the manual and meinial work), tnesions between comples leadership demands & lifestyles and the limited resources of the agricultural economy, they generated ideologies that explained and justified the great social divisions, distinctivly defined of the lowest orders, and developed a cultural glue to help hold its social heiarchy together.
What were some key differences between the three classical civilizations?
greco-Roman political values and institutions differed from the confucian emphasis on defence and beurocratic training. Greek definition of science differed with those of India and China, particularly in the emphasis of theory. While India's Hinduism helped justify & sustain the heiarchy, force and legal matters helped Rome/Greece.
How do the three classical civilizations view social mobility?
India's caste system allowed movement within castes, if wealth was aquired, but little overall mobility. It tied people to their basic social and occupational position at birth. China's beurocratic system allowed a very small number of talented people from below rise on the basis of education. Medeterainian society, with its aristocratic emphisis, limited opportunities to rise to the top, but the importance of aquired wealth gave some non-aristocrats important economic & political opportunities.
Why were there such disparities among social classes in all three classical societies?
Groups at the top of the social heiarchy judged that they had to control lower groups carefully to ensure thier own prosperity. India's untouchables preformed duties culturally evaluated as demeaning but often vital. Greece & Rome relied heavily on the legal & physical complusions of slavery to provide menial service and demanding labor.
How did the three classical civilizations hold their socities togehter despite these difference between social classes?
Greece&Rome left much of the task of managing the social heiarchy to local authorities; community bonds were meant to pull different groups into a sense of common purpose. They also relied on military force and clear legal statements.