Western Civilization Research Paper Example

Western Culture and Civilization propose an ideal that sets impossible standards. “Does Western Civilization exist?” is a question that Appiah, Randall, and Bauerlin interpret in their articles. Every answer is unique, but weighing them requires a rubric. An argument's strength is rooted in how effectively they convey their point. Evidence and analysis are foundations for constructing this. The passion behind the author's assertions also contributes to its strength and the reader’s takeaway. If an author doesn’t convey his passion, readers are less likely to be persuaded. Appiah’s answer combines evidence, analysis, and passion clearer than Bauerlin's and Randall's to argue individuality over cultural labels.

While his passion is present, Bauerlin’s evidence is limited and his analysis is absent. He uses college courses to signify education of Western Culture and its importance. “Stanford replaced Western Culture with Culture, Ideas & Values...A curriculum review in 1994 found that 72% of students didn't like it,” (Bauerlin, 2), is his first focus. This evidence iterates interest in history dropping, and thus an issue in the status quo of history education; interest is supposed to prove Western Culture is not taught properly. However, his evidence only pertains to a small student population, and his use of vague words like “didn’t like it” does not prove causation between the course change and interest dropping. He blames diversity for this issue. “Diversity is not a curriculum. A chinese menu of offerings tells students that civilization has no central thread...No wonder the fields have lost their appeal, collecting only 12 percent of all bachelor’s degrees,” (Bauerlin, 2). This quote displays his opinion of the teaching of Western Civilization, but his analysis is lacking. Saying “Diversity is not a curriculum” asserts his opinion as a fact, and he fails to substantiate this with proof and explanation. Examples like “a chinese menu of offerings” only partially represent diversity, as it should encompass exposure to other ideas than your own. Next, 12% of bachelor's degrees may appear insignificant, but how this compares to other subjects is not explained. According to NCES.gov, health programs receive 18% of degrees, and 11% lie in business; 12% in history is not irregular. Despite this, his opinion is clear and demonstrates passion. Readers can easily distinguish his assertions like Western Civilization education is critical. Though not well proved or analyzed, his passion is present and makes his argument comprehensive.

Randall argues education needs to express that Western Culture is founded on aspects of Christian and European Culture. Moreso than Bauerlin, his opinions are also clear and passionate. He uses  “Of course, Western Civilization exists. It's not just that we read the Bible and Homer...It’s that every generation from Rome to the present has continuously added to the same culture.” (Randall, 4). His use of “of course” and “continuously added to the same culture”  show his confidence and makes this argument more agreeable. This evidence, however, applies to only some people's religious experiences. “What we read in the Bible and Homer” does not encompass religions differing from Christianity, and neglects to include how these contribute to culture. He next considers the Pledge of Allegiance. “The three-thousand-year history of words like allegiance, republic, nation, God, liberty, and justice. You need...to understand why we pledge ourselves to them, ” (Randall, 5). This evidence attempts to pinpoint founding principles of Western Culture but is subjective. He selects words like “republic” and “God” to argue a relationship between European and Western culture; however, he neglects words like “one”  and “indivisible” to show the value of unity. Finally, his blatant repulse towards other modern aspects of Western Civilization demonstrates passion, but disrespect as well. “This brain damage makes it possible for Americans to be molded by woke tyranny’s euphemisms of social justice, multiculturalism, and global citizenship,” (Randall, 5). His use of “brain damage” towards aspects like “social justice” and “multiculturalism” disrespects the values many Americans hold. This interferes with the agreeability of his argument; not only does it lack any evidence or analysis, but reading it triggers instant agreement or disagreement, as it's a controversial topic. His passion behind this point is clear, but this analysis of social values is ignorant and makes his argument weaker.

Appiah combines evidence, analysis, and passion when arguing a society’s “culture” fails to represent individual values. He includes arguments similar to Bauerlin and Randall and introduces it as the “Golden Nugget.” He identifies European and Christian culture is related to Western culture and this link is perceived to epitomize perfection, thus "Golden;" to contradict, he mentions our understanding of history is influenced by many different groups, rather than just one. “Much of our modern understanding of classic philosophy among the ancient Greeks we only have because those texts were recovered... in the [Italian] Renaissance from the Arabs,”(Appiah, 5). His analysis of this evidence shows how texts and philosophies are polluted by other empires, implying the "Golden Nugget" is a myth. His use of “our modern understanding” and “only because those texts were discovered” directly contradict Randall and Bauerlin. He next poses an answer to "Does Western culture or Civilization exist." “You really can walk and talk like an African-American and think with… Emmanuel Kant, as well as Martin Luther King and Miles Davis. No Muslim essence stops the inhabitants of Dar al-islam from taking up anything from western civilization, including Christianity or democracy. No western essence is there to stop a New Yorker of any ancestry taking up Islam,” (Appiah, 8). His use of words like “you can really” and “no...essence stops” demonstrate his belief of individuals being completely independent of one another. He incorporates evidence in history, forms unique analyses, and passionately argues for individuality.

Appiah’s argument outshines Randall’s and Bauerlin’s as he better incorporates evidence, analysis, and passion. “ ‘I am human, I think nothing human alien to me.’ Now there’s an identity worth holding on to.” (Appiah, 9). His conviction of individuality over cultural labels is epitomized here. While Appiah’s argument was best argued, no answer is perfect. Every interpretation is affected by our preconceived notions and opinions. However, the strength of an argument is determinable through developing a rubric, and Appiah touched on every aspect of making one great.