Rating: 
Summary: Phenomenal!
Review: Guns, Germs, and Steel is a most informative, engaging book! Jared Diamond takes the reader on a whirlwind tour through the past 13,000 years of world history, masterfully combining such diverse disciplines as anthropology, archaeology, epidemiology, infectious disease, and plant biology. Figures and charts throughout the book are immensely useful, and you will find yourself referring back to them often. Dr. Diamond presents a solid theory of how native plant and animal resources, not native intelligence, translated into the ability of certain civilizations to gain social, economic, and political advantage over others. Your understanding of the world will change after reading this book.
Rating: 
Summary: Inverted racism (2nd part)
Review: Jared Diamond has made friend with a Papoo named Yali. He has found him intelligent and well educated - which is not surprising. He concludes that Papoos "are on the average,more intelligent, more expressive and more interested in things than the average European or American". Of course, that is not racism. A crucial proof is given : Papoos are more able than Whites to find their way in the jungle. If they have not yet made a space shuttle, nor conquered China, the fault is in their bad environment. From our modest point of view, we say that, by chance, all peoples on the Earth are not as passive or devoid of imagination as Papoos. If Diamond had spent a few days visiting the French countryside, he would have seen that an environment has to be worked upon, it has to be dressed, to be reclaimed, to be irrigated ....
Rating:
Summary: Inverted racism (1st part)
Review: Jared Diamond has spent 33 yrs studying the fauna of New Guinea. That leaves little time to observe the rest ofthe world. He thinks that the appearance of high civilizations is explained by favourable environments, especially those propitious for the breeding of draught-animals. According to him, people of Black Africa have not been lucky : as draught animals, they have only inherited of the African buffalo. And the African buffalo is reportedly known for its bad temper. Mr Diamond does not ask himself if the phlegmatic humour of our bulls and cows (do not be too trustful) does not result from an appropriated selection, getting rid of agressive individuals.
Rating: 
Summary: Misshelved
Review: This is a book of speculation, not science.
Rating: 
Summary: Elegant thesis to questions of human development
Review: "Guns, Germs, and Steel" is one of those books that makes sense, expresses an idea that is so simple and clear, that it is very convincing. Is it correct? Who knows? It's a theory, and an elegant one.Basically, the book boils down into that old anxiom about the monkeys at typewriters, that if you get enough of them together for enough time, one of them will type the complete works of Shakespeare. You'll hear people claiming the book is "political" or "flawed." And it is, to some extent. But Diamond effectively backs up his major points with convincing data, enough to force us to consider his points. However, some critics go so far as to claim that Diamond doesn't consider culture or politics as factors in technological advancement. This is patently untrue. Diamond stresses the cultural and political factors in population advancement. Those populations with more resources, larger numbers, and more time had the ability to develop sophisticated cultures capable of supporting inventors, artists, and politicians capable of making great changes. Other critics cite biological differences in humans, saying that Diamond purposefully ignores these differences. This might be true, but not important. After all, if all humans evolved from a common set of ancestors, how could biological differences evolve apart from environment? Again, place and time trumps. Naturally, the book's loudest opponents are those who feel threatened on a personal level by Diamond's thesis. Those who want to cherish the accomplishements of their ancestors. Those who feel that political systems are the result of the character of the people ..... Those who feel comforted by the color of their skin.
Rating:
Summary: If combining Science w/History is Scientism,Scientismist beI
Review: "Guns, Germs, and Steel: the Fates of Human Societies" by Jared Diamond Normally, when I read an argumentative book I attempt to find holes and flaws in logic, in an attempt to sift through to the persuasive. As I read Diamond, perhaps that critical faculty ebbed - more likely, I just found myself ebullient at finding a book that so deftly unites history (and pre-history) with science. No major criticism comes to mind, though I'm sure with the amount of information packed into 425 pages, experts in their respective fields might have differing perspectives on the more contentious archaeological and historical issues that Diamond presents (e.g. dating of migrations like Clovis - though Diamond seems fairly careful to differentiate between his views and those having more consensus.). Abstracting Diamond, my only real analogy could be a computer program called SimCity, which allows a person to tinker with a city's fauna and geography and observe the results. It's a SimCivilization view of human history. Rather than looking primarily at isolated incidents, say, the assassination of Abe Lincoln, it is sort of a meta-history that looks at the trends of history and tries to correlate those trends with geographic variables. Diamond's explanations span continents, showing that Australia and Tasmania's until recent technological backwardness is linked to the nutrient-poor and metal limited environment, rather than as "explained" by the 19th century colonialist ethnocentric presuppositions (or to put it in a less biased manner the technology the Aborigines had met the need of different conditions, and had less resources to build upon) . The European conquest of the Americas, likewise had to do with the isolation of the complex societies of the Americas by latitude differentials (slowing the spread of agriculture from one place to another, versus the East West axis of Eurasia which promoted the spread of domesticated crops across a wide area) and natural boundaries, coupled most importantly with a relative lack of native domesticable species. The biological and scientific components of Diamond's theorizing come into the fore when he discusses the nature of epidemic diseases, and their spread from livestock to human hosts, which leads to human populations with greater immunity over many generations in areas so effected (if they aren't hit at one stroke with wave after wave of diseases with entirely no immunity as happened with most of the former inhabitants of North America.). I think one of the things that excited me the most about Diamond was the stark contrast in his method of history in comparison to my rather dismal experiences with some other "historians" (Diamond is a professor of physiology). Sure, Diamond has ideological views, but they aren't the whole interpretive lens, and don't bog down his prose. He brings observations to the table, and doesn't overtly bring a non-empirical ideological prism through which history must be explained (though of course there may be the turf-defending rote charge of scientism, in which case I await the postmodern attempt to deconstruct paleontology as successfully as Sokal (?) mockingly deconstructed physics. Why at 2500 B.C.E. do the humanities' explanations suddenly become omnipotent? So the humanities and history chairs at universities can feel like what they're doing is important, and equally so?)
Rating:
Summary: An amazing analysis of history
Review: Jared Diamond does not explain why everything in the world is the way it is today, but he does a very good job explaining how a few basic environmental factors broadly shaped the distribution of power among peoples from the earliest dates in human civilization. The powers that he mentions (in Part 3 of the book) are those of advanced weaponry, writing systems that made communication more efficient, immunity to disease, and complex political organization. What makes this book so interesting, though, is his discussion of the role of agriculture, animal domestication, and geographic location in creating a setting that favored or hindered the development and proliferation of "guns, germs, and steel." The first part of the book introduces the reader to this idea, but it is he second part of the book, "The Rise and Spread of Food Production," that explains it and thus encompasses most of the premise upon which the book builds. The fourth part of the book is a series of quick case studies where Diamond shows his thesis in action. It is not without value since it is empirical evidence for his theory, but it becomes a little repetitive and the joy of discovering new knowledge fades. And I agree with others who thought Diamond's political correctness a little distracting. Nonetheless, it is enlightening and fun to read and what more can one ask for than that?
Rating:
Summary: Learned a lot
Review: I found this book tremendously interesting. It tries to answer the question of why, when different cultures come into contact, one will usually take the other. For example, it asks why the Europeans defeated the Native Americans instead of the the Aztecs sailing across the ocean and colonizing Spain. I think the reason that I am so excited about this book is that I actually *learned stuff*. I never knew how or why certain animals or plants were domesticated. I never knew why the "Fertile Crescent" is now just a big desert. I certainly never knew that Madagascar was colonized by people from Indonesia, as opposed to people from Africa. And so on. I you are at all interested in history or geography, this is a book that you will be happy you read.
Rating:
Summary: THE comprehensive view of human history
Review: Anyone suggesting they could encompass all human history in a mere 400 pages should be met with derisive scorn. Diamond, against all logic, has accomplished this feat, and done it admirably. The question, 'why do white people have so much and black people so little?', is a valid query of increasing importance. In responding, he describes how humans developed agriculture, domesticated animals and attained a sedentary life. This change from a nomadic hunter-gatherer society led to new diseases. Immunity to them was later gained only over the passage of time. Utilization of natural resources lead to utilization of natural resources to create superior weapons, allowing settled peoples to become imperialists, an anachronism considered logically. He anticipates the criticism of 'geographical determinism' certain to be raised, but his case remains based on several grand geophysical concepts. He starts with the idea that the East- West axis of Eurasia gave that region many advantages of temperate climate and easy mobility, as opposed to the Americas' North-South orientation. He continues with an assessment of the native fauna of various regions for the likelihood of domestication. Although little cultural is discussed here, he describes how small bands of humans grew to villages then larger agglomerations leading to 'kleptocracies' [a wonderful term!] in which wealth was no longer evenly distributed. Such a social structure led to the rise of nation-states which could engage in greater imperialist enterprises. While Diamond portrays humanity's movements around the globe, some aspects clearly require further explanation. He stipulates that the Americas could have been populated in less than a millennia. What prompted such a rapid expansion if game foods were readily available? He describes the barriers to cultural exchange throughout Mesoamerica, such as beasts of burden in the Andes never being merged with Mayan wheels and crops raised successfully in one area being unsuitable in another. What drove humans over the isthmus to another continent? Did people really move so rapidly over vastly differing environments while losing communication with their points of origin? In keeping to his broad-brush approach, Diamond avoids cultural issues until the Epilogue. Only then does he raise Christianity and Islam as imperialist societies in contrast with other cultures. It was astonishing to discover that, in the last analysis, Diamond fails to answer the very question that resulted in this book. This is not a failure on his part. He impressively covers the 'how' of social structures and their impact on what seems to be a natural tendency for humans to migrate. Yet, his original question addresses European expansion to other, already occupied, lands. Having already absolved capitalism as the motivation, it is surprising that he ignores the role of Christianity in European imperialism. Diamond may be forgiven for avoiding this issue since his analysis focuses on the environmental benefits Eurasians enjoyed before beginning their global conquest. But European expansion has had such an impact on world cultures that motivation requires a more fervent appeal for resolution than the mild query found at the close of the book. Still, we can't address that question properly without the background Diamond has provided. His call for further study is welcome for many reasons. Anyone involved in international programs will find this book a useful resource. It dispels many commonly-held myths still held even by professionals who deal with 'Third World' countries. A careful reader will see questions posed in a new framework and take note of these to their benefit. His description of the vast ranges of human movement must now be considered in light of the world's current trend to balkanization. Now that we have nowhere to go, in what direction will that heritage of continuous movement take us? Read Diamond to provide the necessary background, then ask yourself these and related questions. It's well worth the time, and reading him is not a strenuous task.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting Theories, Overstated
Review: Mr. Diamond spent at least 20 years in New Guinea studying. While there a politician named Yali asked him why Europeans had more "cargo", modern trade, then the natives of New Guinea. "Guns, Germs, and Steel" is set up as an answer to this question. It is filled with interesting theories, insightful observations, and a great overview of the last 20,000 years of human history. Yet Mr. Diamond's final answer after over 400 page of text, dumb luck, is very unsatisfying. Dumb luck? Yes, dumb luck. Europeans came to New Guinea because they had a larger population which allowed them to develop "civilization" first. But why the larger population? Geography. Mr. Diamond believes geography is destiny. He argues that people everywhere will exploit their environment. The more resources a group of people have, the easier, and quicker, they will grow. On the other hand, the more barren a land, the slower the growth of any people found living there. Europeans and Asians developed civilization earlier because their ancestors were lucky enough to be living in a place where there were more crops to grow. In the "Fertile Belt", a land region roughly occupying modern Turkey, Mr. Diamond states that there were, naturally occurring, (1) more types of edible plants (2) these plants had more nutritional value and (3) because Europe and Asia is on a more horizontal axis then Africa or the Americas, these plants could be planted over a larger period of land then crops in America, Africa, or Australia. Now, were the people in the "Fertile Valley" really just lucky? Within his own book are arguments to undercut his theory. Strawberries were, to my surprise, not domesticated until the Middle Ages. This occurred after many years of experimentations by Monks. (who also eventually came up with Champagne) The point being that these Monks were actively attempting to develop them. Did the people in the "Fertile Valley" have their own "Monks" who developed these earlier crops? Did they have explorers searching the world for edible foods? There are so many great examples of how the political structure of a society will predetermine its success, regardless of the environment, that Mr. Diamonds failure to adequately address this point detracted from his book. For example, Chinese explorers came to East Africa, and maybe America, hundreds of years before the Europeans. The Chinese stopped exploring based on a political decision. The land of paper, gunpowder and so much else began to stagnate. Copernicus, Galileo, Darwin. These men's research was published after they died, or they recanted their observations, or they delayed publishing for many years; for fear of the Catholic Church. Today South Korea is a one of the four economic "young tigers." North Koreans are starving. The same people, the same land, yet much different results. Politics can make a greater difference in the development of a country's life then environmental factors. And that is the biggest problem with this book. It reeks of politics. Mr. Diamond detracts from the science of this book because he goes so far out of his way to be politically correct. There are many examples. Another reviewer here talks about the major race problems in this book. I agree. In addition, let's examine Mr. Diamond's view on the mass extinctions which followed the colonization of America. These extinctions occurred from the period of 17,000 years to 12,000 years ago. (p.46) These extinctions occurred over five thousand years. Mr. Diamond reject a germ theory of extinction and states that hunters in America killed off most large animals during this time. This lack of large animals later dramatically retarded later civilizations in America, and their ability to grow. In his words, "why did most of them pick the 23'rd (ice age) to expire in concert, in the presence of all those harmless humans?" Why does it matter? His central point, lack of animals hurting development, can be made under either theory. The important fact was there were no large animals when farming became more common. It only matters if you want to make a different point. Over and over and over and over, Mr. Diamond constantly discuss how the destruction of animals and the environment has adverse effects on society. Okay! I get it. I even agree, to a point. But when you keep talking about issues not directly connected to your thesis, it distracts from the book. It also makes a 200 pages book, twice as long. It is unfortunate. "Guns, Germs, and Steel" should have been a great book. Instead, in the final analysis, it is interesting but too long and too political. I still enjoyed, very much, many parts of it, but the sum total and the final answer to human hstory "dumb luck" is too contrived to strongly recommend.
|
