Reddit reviews The Myth of Continents: A Critique of Metageography

If anyone is truly interested in this subject:

The Myth of Continents

I had to read it for a grad class a couple years ago and it covers this question in detail. It was a tough read, and I actually forget most of it. Maybe I'll look at it again sometime soon.

>See, now you're trying to add logical thought. That doesn't work very well in academia.

Yeah, those concepts are like that. They only work on a diffuse, floaty level. They all look neat and simple until you look too closely, and discover how problematic they are. Not only the West, but also zones like Asia, Latin America, Africa, etc. They are all problematic in one way or another, and have various definitions depending whom you ask. There is actually a cool book about this: The Myth of Continents.

In your case, a more honest definition of non-western, in the sense used by your professor, would have been "whatever group I, as a White American, do not feel identified with"

http://www.amazon.com/The-Myth-Continents-Critique-Metageography/dp/0520207432

http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/l/lewis-myth.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continent#Number_of_continents

>The six-continent combined-America model is used in Spanish-speaking countries[26] and in some parts of Europe including Greece (equivalent 5 inhabited continents model – i.e. excluding Antarctica – still also found in texts).[18]

Talking with people educated in different countries.

Its really not important and is quite arbitrary. I was just disagreeing with 'they have professionals for that shit'