In my final project I will
be touching upon one of the great questions of the human race – was
urbanization good for our species or should we have stayed ruralized? Ever
since the creation of the city-state (approximately 3500 BCE, Sumerian
civilization), as a species, humanity has moved towards increased urbanization.
In 2008, for the first time in history, more than half of the world’s
population resides in towns and cities (cite this for validity). Is it better
that we have moved into this form of living or should we have stayed in a more
ruralized society? Personally, I find that increased urbanization is the best
direction we have taken as a species.
how exactly is this important? In our class studies of humanity interacting
with their environments, I find one of this to be one of the more important
questions. In comparing rural life versus urban life, have we overall chosen
the right path? True, rural living is in no means under extinction but you
cannot doubt that cities are constantly growing. Urbanization has brought some
of the best qualities of our race; trade, technology…
obvious counter argument is that urbanization is possibly the worst thing that
we have done as a species because of; spread and creation of disease, greater
interaction causes war and destruction of the environment. We have undeniably
hurt the Earth in more than one way and I find greater communication to be the
best symptom of urbanization because of trade, it too has brought some of the
worst tragedies in human history; slavery and war. Nonetheless, I would like to
argue that some of these negatives overshadow the greatness of our
technological advancements and movement forward as a whole race. We have made
great strides in the past two hundred years alone, the future seemingly is
In my quest for recourses to perform research
from for this project I have found luck in a couple books; Frontiers in Resource and Rural Economics by JunJie Wu, Paul W. Barkley, Bruce A. Weber
and Urban Centers and Rural Contexts in Late
S. Burns and John W. Eadie. To start off, I chose “Frontiers” because it runs
down all the different aspects that I was planning on writing about which range
from the environment to politics. The book seems to focus on human drive and
logic behind the actions taken in different fields of society. As for choosing “Urban
Centers,” it brings the historical aspect to my argument and at the same time
bring form to a counterargument. As I interpret from the books summary, it is
the collection of many volumes of books by in a series that analyze just
regions and time periods, all in one centralized paperback. I also, plan on
using Wilder and Abbey as sources, specifically in what context I am unsure but
it does not seem difficult for they are opinionated in their beliefs of
Burns, Thomas S., and John William. Eadie.Urban Centers and Rural Contexts in Late Antiquity. East Lansing: Michigan State UP, 2001. Print.
Wu, JunJie, Paul W. Barkley, and Bruce A.
Weber.Frontiers in Resource and
Rural Economics: Human-nature, Rural-urban Interdependencies. Washington, DC: Resources for the Future, 2008.
Abbey, Edward. Desert Solitaire; a Season in
the Wilderness. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1968. Print
Wilder, Laura Ingalls, and Garth Williams.By the Shores of Silver Lake. New York: Harper & Bros., 1953. Print.
background history on the topic and why it matters
personal ties and interests to the topic
the problem or argument
Body Topics –
a tad more historical background for clearance
by social, economic, and political changes
the positives of my side of the argument
– lay out the negatives, explain the negatives
to in class books
a full circle without literally repeating myself
where we are today as a society and where we may be headed in the future
the best ending that I can possibly come up with because the audience always
remembers a great ending and it is the best way to get a great grade!