It is a fact that humanity has established various civilizations since written history. The comparison of civilizations has been made on various scales. From the 17th century onwards, the conception, ontology and evaluation of civilizations were carried out using a different systematic scaling. In other words, while the previous classifications were developed on the basis of “good” and “bad” after the Enlightenment Period,“ progressive ”,“ advanced ”,“ underdeveloped ”and“ barbarian definitions started. Thus, how the civilizations developed in a dialectic; using evolutionary and progressive scales; In terms of “power” and “wealth” readings have become the most common method of analysis. Each analysis made through this method also becomes visible as a political expression, a political imagination and a political design. The credibility of the political system has also become an issue connected with which method and which civilization epistemy is built. Which civilization is more valuable constitutes an important scale of reputation with prescriptive readings. However, what makes civilization valuable is the ontology of civilization. But what makes civilization valuable is the ontology of civilization. Therefore, it is possible to say that the ideals or principles on which civilization is based constitute a scale that makes civilization valuable. So, what data does "advanced" or "good civilization" correspond to? What do "advanced" and "underdeveloped" or "good" and "bad" mean? questions such as actually correspond to an ethical problem. In this study, especially comments on how to discuss civilization problem; “Forward”, “back”, “good” and “bad” concepts are tried to be evaluated.