How many Civs are left?

[Jon Miller]

Indian, Chinese area... Turkey area

JM

[snoopy369]

Jon, do you mean India/China = 1 civ?

If so, I disagree

Otherwise, sure. Though Turkey could be in either MidEast (Arabian etc.) or Indian, or even Western Europe. They're the classic "torn" country, split between several civilizations. (Look up Huntington...

[Jon Miller]

So I would say:

Western Civs:
Anglo
Continental

Eastern Civs:
Slav
Muslim

Arab Civ

Asian Civs:
Indian
(others)

Oriental Civs:
Chinese
(others)

African Civs:
Muslim
(others)

Jon Miller

[Jon Miller]

I probably should include a S American Civ or 3

JM

[notyoueither]

Oh yes, you would want to be correct.

[joncha]

[Spiffor]

Let's see.

From a Civ4 perspective
America
Arabs
Aztecs
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
Inca
India
Japan
Mali
Mongolia
Persia
Rome
Russia
Spain

4 down, 13 to go.

[notyoueither]

Hehe.

Rome gone, but Greece still in it.

Heh.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

My take (adding to Spiffor):

Originally posted by Spiffor
Let's see.

From a Civ4 perspective
America
Arabs
Aztecs
China
Egypt
England
France
Germany
Greece
Inca
India
Japan
Mali
Mongolia
Persia
Rome
Russia
Spain

I'd say France and Germany are now a new civ, the EU
England is subsumed under "America"
Greece, Mali, and Mongolia are nations and societies, but no longer civs

Spain is still a civ, but is located in the New World

[Spiffor]

More seriously, I don't think the question can be answered without a good definition of what "a civilization" is.

"Civilization" has almost always been used as a political tool to boast one's society's greatness, over the "barbaric" society of the others (this is why Greece was "civilized while the Persians were "barbaric", this is why the west was "civilized" and brought "civilization" to China, etc.)

The word is thus loaded, and it is difficult to have a neutral debate about it.

My neutral definition of "civilization" would be that the word applies to any society that has moved beyond hunting/gathering, and is engaged in actively shaping its environment for its prosperity. As a result, nearly every person on earth lives in civilized society (and yes, even the nomadic herders from the mongolian steppes are civilized, since they live in warm yurts and work to create enough animals for their subsistence).

Most unclear is what distinguishes one "civilization" with another. Is it language? Is it history? Is it technology? Is it societal preconceptions? Is it collective identity? Is it art? It's probably a blend of all that.
Yet, we can't consider every factor to be of be-all end-all importance. Otherwise, every micro-society would be a "civilization" on its own right, because a few words are different, because they call themselves something different, because one societal idea is different, etc.

As a result, if we want to have a clear picture of the world, where the civs aren't counted by the million, we need to make broad groups (Huntington-style). The problem is that the definition of what is an essential difference, and what isn't, is completely arbitrary, and depends on the prejudices of each of us.

This is why I don't think a debate about the different civilizations can have any intersubjectivity, which is a big no-no in political science.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by notyoueither
Rome gone, but Greece still in it.

Culture >>> Military power.

[Spiffor]

And I didn't want to get permabanned by Markos

[Q Classic]

Oriental is such a bad word. Not because it's offensive (some find it that way; I do not), but because it's... confusing.

Oriental rugs are not Chinese in origin.

Therefore, instead, I'd suggest this:

Western European
Eastern European
South Asian
East Asian

[Saras]

Oriental rugs

[Jon Miller]

Yeah, the Orient at one time meant the area closer to where Pakistan is now..

I admit I might have confused things with my language.

JM