Question

after you watch

1. this video provided an argument for beginning a course in 1750. do you agree with this argument? why or why not?

Explanation:

To answer this, we analyze the historical context around 1750. The mid - 18th century was a period of great change. The Industrial Revolution was starting (with new manufacturing methods, like the use of steam power beginning to be explored), which transformed economies and societies. In the realm of ideas, the Enlightenment was in full swing, with thinkers like Rousseau, Locke, and Montesquieu influencing political, social, and philosophical thought. Also, global trade was expanding, with colonial empires reaching new heights and the beginnings of a more interconnected global economy. If the course is about history, culture, or the development of modern society, 1750 is a good starting point as it is at the cusp of many transformative events. For example, the Industrial Revolution would go on to reshape the way people worked, lived, and interacted, and the Enlightenment ideas would fuel political revolutions (like the American and French Revolutions) in the coming decades. So, agreeing with the argument makes sense because 1750 marks the start of a period with profound and far - reaching changes that are crucial to understanding the modern world. (Note: If the video had a different focus, the reasoning would adjust, but based on common historical narratives, this is a strong case for 1750 as a starting point.)

Answer:

I agree with the argument for beginning a course in 1750. Around 1750, the Industrial Revolution was emerging, bringing radical changes to production and society. The Enlightenment was also flourishing, shaping political and social thought. Additionally, global trade and colonial dynamics were evolving, setting the stage for modern - era developments like political revolutions (e.g., American, French) and long - term economic restructuring. These events at and after 1750 are pivotal for understanding the modern world's social, economic, and political landscapes.