One of the most debated questions of our time asks: What shapes societies more, Science or imperialism. These subjects both hold a tremendous weight on the path of which societies are created, but only one has had the most dominance; not one or the other. Imperialism is the domination of one country over the other, but in the core beginnings of humanity, dominance between countries was nonexistent. There were no empires to dominate; the only necessity was sustainability. Science was used through the beginning, middle, and will be used till the end of time. While it may seem to some that imperialism has shaped societies more, it is actually true that scientific discovery has played a predominant role in every society, far more than imperialism.
Scientific discovery spurred rapid development in many societies which has allowed them to endure the passage of time. The cavemen, one of the first humans on this planet, certainly used the innovation of fire to help them push through. If there was harsh weather in the times of the caveman, many people would have died from freezing. But then the scientific discovery of fire came about 500,000 years ago. This fire is what generated heat for many families during tough weather and is a great example of how science kept the cavemen alive. If they did not survive, this paper would not have been written. Our lives are increasingly affected, for better or worse, by innovations in science; some of these innovations we rely on to present future threats (Guardian). Whether science was a byproduct of innovation or it came out of necessity, either way it severely impacted society for better or for worse. In the case of cavemen, it allowed them to survive.
The foundation of numerous societies is base...
... middle of paper ...
...nce works through though every society, even simple things such as using a stick as a spear is science. Science has made the countries that have utilized it prosperous, and it has allowed people to survive in harsh climates. Imperialism was used by quite a few countries, and it created major gains in terms of economic development and resources. The countries that suffered from imperialism had severe damage and perhaps could not recover. But the statement remains the same; imperialism had only been used by a few advocates of it, and even with the damage, the credit will still go to science. Science has allowed imperialism to be germane through society because science made the weapons that were utilized by those countries to practice imperialism. Science has the most prevalent effect on our society, and that effect has led our society in 2014 to be what it has become.
The. Ganz, Cheryl R. "Science Advancing Mankind." The Society for the History of Technology. 2000. The. Haskell, Douglas. A. A.
Social Darwinism fueled imperialism by making imperialistic nations believe that their imperialistic ventures were a natural turn of events and not a cruel, opressionistic system of government. These imperialistic nations exploited other nations and cultures and their troops’ motivation was the glory of the nation and the eradication of the weaker races on earth. These soldiers believed in Social Darwinism. Also, nations were able to become imperialistic because of the support of their people. They “marketed” imperialism through Social Darwinism. Finally, when these weaker countries were taken over, they were brainwashed to believe that the invasion and oppression of their people were just a result of nature. These oppressed people believed this because, according to Social Darwinism, only the fittest survive. And so, the imperialistic nations would survive and multiply while the oppressed civilizations were invaded and changed.
Introduction: The epoch of imperialism cannot be defined simply as a proliferation of inflated egos tied to the hardened opinions of nationalists, but also a multi-faceted global rivalry with roots of philosophies tainted with racism and social Darwinism. The technique of each imperialist was specific to the motivations and desires of each combative, predominantly Western power and subsequently impacted the success of each imperialist and its colonies. Driven by industrialization, Europeans are aware of the urgent need for raw materials and new markets to maintain a constant rate of expansion and wealth. Imperialism became a competition; in general, the European countries led with fervor while the non-Western regions deemed likely to be stepped on.
The British Empire was a period of , but it was only this way due to their imperialistic views and the exploitation of people within the Empire. Even though the British Imperialism of the late 19th century/early 20th century brought great wealth, knowledge, and technological advancements, but at the expense of others. Britain had to find a way to justify their ‘superiority’ over these other countries….. Scientists and social scientists created many sciences, including social Darwinism, eugenics, phrenology, and polygenism. Many historians have argued whether or not these sciences were proposed in order to justify the British Empire or not. These pseudo-sciences were constructed to rationalize the imperialism during the 19th century. This paper
Atwood takes many of today’s potential scientific developments and illustrates the worst possible outcome of what may happen if we continue the unregulated pursuit of knowledge. In reality, the scientific advances of today will yield a higher standard of living for the majority of the world tomorrow. We will continue to push for the best in everything including science, medicine, and technology; we will not allow any single person to make the sole decision to develop an idea. Scientific progression will save many lives; therefore, it should and will always be there for us.
New imperialism was the mid nineteenth and twentieth centuries cultural equivalent to a modern day mafia, its roots entangled in the economic, cultural, and humanistic aspects of life. The sole objective of the nations entailed the exploitation of their controlled state. Gestating from the change in control of Asian and African nations to the Europeans by means of political deviance, malicious sieges, and strategic military attacks. The juxtaposition to the modern equivalent endures as the aforesaid is sheltered by the fairytale that these nations were in need of aid and by doing so the Europeans were the good guys. The ideas of new imperialism are greatly influenced by those of the enlightenment. Taking place during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the enlightenment was an intellectual movement with the goal of social progress (Genova, 1/11). Armed with scientific thought and reason, enlightenment thinkers set out to explore the fields of science, economics, and human nature. Brilliant minds such as Voltaire, Kant and others all across Western Europe collaborated to further knowledge. The enlightenment laid the foundation on which new imperialism sprung, embedding the ideas of an incessant need to explore not only the scientific world but the physical world as well. The enlightenments goals and ideas significantly influenced new imperialism, because the enlightenment created a need for new means and a purpose to accrue them.
Imperialism greatly impacted the world. With imperialism came connections between nations and divisions between peoples.
Having understood that the world has taken the form it has through the domination or imperialism of Western countries, it is said that they are the agents that have greatly influenced the world; their ideologies in addition to their political as well as economic influences have spread across the globe through time (Headrick, 1981).
Dr. Michael Shermer is a Professor, Founder of skeptic magazine, and a distinguished and brilliant American science writer to say the least. In His book The Moral Arc: How Science Makes Us Better People he sets out to embark on the daunting task of convincing and informing the reader on sciences’ ability to drives the expansion of humanity and the growth of the moral sphere. Although such a broad and general topic could be hard to explain, Shermer does so in a way that is concise, easy to understand, and refreshing for the reader. This novel is riddled with scientific facts, data, and pictures to back up shermers claims about the history of science, humanity and how the two interact with one another.
Does society influence us or do we influence it? The thought of whether the society shapes us or individuals shape our behaviors and culture is extremely dubious and won't be replied whatsoever, possibly since it goes both ways. We have all been brought up in a society around individuals who impart to us bunches of characters and statuses or else we couldn't have been conveying like now and imparting thoughts and that answers and clarifies whether it is nature or nurture. It's a reality that what has formed our dispositions and who we are currently is a mixture of interior and outer compels, for example, socialization, education, and drives of all sorts. These interior and outer impacts have even been demonstrated and delineated by numerous sociologists- Jean Piaget, Sigmund Freud, Herbert Mead. One of the stars that I truly acknowledge is Ahmed Zaki, the Egyptian actor. He had dependably been imaginative in all his works and had been conveying significant messages and showing lessons in life that have been once in a while known around individuals and passed on to the general population. I accept that Zaki came to be as innovative and of service as he is to the society because of how he was socialized. When he understood that he ended up in educating individuals by his movies and plays and acknowledged those morals and ethics he chose to work by them. Socialization is essentially the predominant outside compel that influences an individual's perspective to the planet. While very nearly all individuals are occupied to adapt up to the quickly progressing life and its profits, I accept he is one of the few actors who showed his own perspectives fearlessly without dread or shame. He called for the equity and fairness to all individual...
5. Burns, William E. Science in the Enlightenment: An Encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2003. Print.
Throughout the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, radical and controversial ideas were created in what would become a time period of great advances. The Scientific Revolution began with a spark of inspiration that spread a wild fire of ideas through Europe and America. The new radical ideas affected everything that had been established and proven through religious views. "The scientific revolution was more radical and innovative than any of the political revolutions of the seventeenth century."1 All of the advances that were made during this revolutionary time can be attributed to the founders of the Scientific Revolution.
The Scientific Revolution, perhaps one of the most significant examples of human beingsí relationship with the natural world, changed the way seventeenth and eighteenth century society operated. The power of human knowledge has enabled intellectual, economical, and social advances seen in the modern world. The Scientific Revolution which included the development of scientific attitudes and skepticism of old views on nature and humanity was a slow process that spanned over a two century period. During the Scientific Revolution, scientific knowledge enabled humans to control nature in order to improve society. With leaders such as Nicolaus Copernicus, Galileo Galilei, Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, and Rene Descartes, the Scientific Revolution proves to be a crucial piece to the puzzle of understanding the effects of humansí interactions with the natural world.
Durkheim was a social theorist whose main concern was the basis of integration and solidarity in human societies. Initially, his focus was society as a whole, later he brought his attention to examining rituals and interactions of people in face-to-face contact. Durkheim’s main concern was to analyze how societies could maintain their integrity and coherence in the modern era, when things such as shared religious and ethnic background could no longer be assumed. In response to this concern, he wrote greatly about the effects of laws, religion, education and similar forces on society and social integration. He didn’t understand how individuals could feel tied to each other in an increasingly individualistic society. Durkheim wanted to explain what held societies and social groups together and how it was done.
HUNTING AND GATHERING SOCIETIES are the simplest types of societies in which people rely on readily available vegetation and hunted game for subsistence. Only a few people can be supported in any given area in such subsistence societies. Hence they usually have no more than 40 members or so, must be nomadic, and have little or no division of labor. All societies began as hunting and gathering societies. These societies were still common until a few hundred years ago. Today only a few remain, including pygmies in central Africa and aborigines in Australia. Most of the rest have had their territory overrun by other forms of society. Hunter-gatherer societies also tend to have non-hierarchical social structures. There is rarely surplus food, and since they are nomadic little ability to store any surplus. Thus full-time leaders, bureaucrats, or artisans are rarely supported by hunter-gathering societies. Hunting and gathering society consumes a great deal of time, energy, and thought, collecting and hunting for food. Most of these societies today generally live in marginal areas where resources are scarce, so life for the hunter and gatherer seems more oriented toward mere survival. Life expectancy is also very low compared to the post industrial society. Technology is minimal in the hunting and gathering society, which again relates back to the need for expending time and energy finding food. Technology in medicine is also primitive for hunters and gatherers. Equality is great and social stratification is low, opposed to the post-industrial society.