Scan barcode
rmdrive's review against another edition
2.5
.5 bc i got through the book. 2 for everything else bc……….. 😩
olwal's review against another edition
4.0
*Audiobook* Some really interesting ideas about the technological and social development of societies, comprehensively analysed and explained. A bit of a slog at times but ultimately a rewarding read.
wyvernfriend's review against another edition
4.0
An interesting book this looks at how human society developed over the years. I'm not totally sure that it's absolutely correct but it makes for interesting reading and should be compulsary reading for some SF and Fantasy writers who are trying to build a credible world.
It's interesting to see how availability of resources and ideas can cause societies to move forward and innovate.
Probably a bit over-simplified in some areas and I did suffer from some glazeover while reading some of the statistics or when he starts getting a little geekish about his own particular area of expertese.
It's interesting to see how availability of resources and ideas can cause societies to move forward and innovate.
Probably a bit over-simplified in some areas and I did suffer from some glazeover while reading some of the statistics or when he starts getting a little geekish about his own particular area of expertese.
minatakegami's review against another edition
reflective
slow-paced
4.0
Interesting ideas that build on each other but can be kinda slow at times to read through all of it
greden's review against another edition
3.0
A lot of people, either consciously or unconsciously, believe the reason why Europeans have conquered the world is by superior genetic neurobiology. Jared Diamond in his widely influential book Guns, Germs and Steel makes a strong case against this belief by pointing out how it was the natural environment that shaped human history.
Diamond outlines a framework to understand the rate of development of civilization based on the settlement date, geographic climate, domesticable crops & animals, and the shape of the continent. These were the ultimate causes that lead to Guns, Germs, and Steel, which were some of the proximate causes of Europe's dominance.
The Polynesian Island proves a clear example of how climate shapes human history, and Diamond illustrates how history is like an onion by New Zealand and Chatmans. New Zealand is warmer, so a sedentary agricultural lifestyle was chosen over a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. This choice caused a denser population, which has an autocatalytic relationship with social complexity and food surplus, which in turn stimulates technological invention. And therefore, it was the Maori from New Zealand that massacred the Moriori from Chatmans and not the other way around.
Diamond gives an interesting account of how people go from hunter-gathering to farming. It is not as clear-cut as it's often portrayed. Many hunter-gatherers do cultivate the land, many people are a hybrid of the two, and it is often a slow gradual unconscious process.
Wild plants have to be domesticated by humans in the same way animals are domesticated, through selection by many generations. But people throughout the ages did not consciously try to alter the genes of the plants to be bigger, easier to pick, grow faster, etc... instead, people had a natural preference for these qualities, picked more of them, and therefore propagated more of them as a result.
The same genetic variation of plants is found throughout Eurasia, while several genetic variations are found in other continents. This implies that the spread of crops was slower in the Americas and Africa compared to Eurasia because a spread of a domesticated crop preempts any inferior genetic versions. Diamond attributes this to the east-west axis of Eurasia compared to the north-south of Americas and Africa. The reason east-west spread is easier is because of the relatively similar climate and day cycles.
And so the relative ease of spreading crops and livestock in Eurasia gave its inhabitants a huge advantage. Not only that but Eurasia has a better selection of domesticable crops and animals, by sheer luck, and therefore farming was a more competitive alternative than hunting and gathering in that continent.
Eurasians domesticated pigs, cattle, horses, and sheep, all gave tremendous benefits in terms of providing protein, muscle power, and transportation. Additionally, living in proximity with livestock made them develop resistance to germs that would eventually kill large populations of those they visited.
The reason why the other continents had no or few domesticated animals was because of bad luck, not cultural differences or inferior intellect. The vast majority of species are not domesticatable, with a myriad of different reasons, ranging from aggressiveness, mating behavior, and adherence to dominance hierarchies. And Eurasia has simply a larger selection of mammals and got lucky in the draw.
As for technological innovation, Diamond assures that it's not any genetic superiority behind the reason why it has been the Eurasians that are behind technological progress. Europeans have noted how conservative and uninterested some modern hunter-gatherers are in new technology and presumes they are stupid. However, some tribes ignore technology, while their neighbors quickly adopt it. The Islamic countries were the original hotspot of innovation, and now they're conservative and lagging behind. Europe has also gone through stages of innovation and stagnation. And so the conclusion is that the time at which civilization is ready to embrace new technology is unrelated to geography or genetics, and for the purpose of this book, random.
The book is sometimes criticized for advocating "Environmental determinism" which suggests that culture and people are merely a product of their geographical location. I don't think Diamond is making that case. Instead, the differences in cultures are shaped by idiosyncratic individuals and events in that area, and the environment does not predict economies or historic events, but on the grand scale, through the thousands of years of human history, the environment certainly has had its influence.
In conclusion, the book's thesis makes a lot of sense, and it was interesting to read about the descriptions of primitive people, and how genetic differences in crops and linguistics could be traced to find the degree to which people traveled. Yuval Harari obviously took great inspiration from this book for his well-known "Sapiens," from the way Diamond explains the stages of human civilization and how religion plays a role in uniting larger civilizations.
However, a lot of this large volume was fleshing out in great detail very specific instances defending the thesis. Considering I'm a moron on these matters I take everything Diamond says in good faith and I skimmed several parts of the book due to uninterest. And therefore I'm reluctant to recommend this and I think reading a synopsis would do for the "everyday normal guy."
Diamond outlines a framework to understand the rate of development of civilization based on the settlement date, geographic climate, domesticable crops & animals, and the shape of the continent. These were the ultimate causes that lead to Guns, Germs, and Steel, which were some of the proximate causes of Europe's dominance.
The Polynesian Island proves a clear example of how climate shapes human history, and Diamond illustrates how history is like an onion by New Zealand and Chatmans. New Zealand is warmer, so a sedentary agricultural lifestyle was chosen over a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. This choice caused a denser population, which has an autocatalytic relationship with social complexity and food surplus, which in turn stimulates technological invention. And therefore, it was the Maori from New Zealand that massacred the Moriori from Chatmans and not the other way around.
Diamond gives an interesting account of how people go from hunter-gathering to farming. It is not as clear-cut as it's often portrayed. Many hunter-gatherers do cultivate the land, many people are a hybrid of the two, and it is often a slow gradual unconscious process.
Wild plants have to be domesticated by humans in the same way animals are domesticated, through selection by many generations. But people throughout the ages did not consciously try to alter the genes of the plants to be bigger, easier to pick, grow faster, etc... instead, people had a natural preference for these qualities, picked more of them, and therefore propagated more of them as a result.
The same genetic variation of plants is found throughout Eurasia, while several genetic variations are found in other continents. This implies that the spread of crops was slower in the Americas and Africa compared to Eurasia because a spread of a domesticated crop preempts any inferior genetic versions. Diamond attributes this to the east-west axis of Eurasia compared to the north-south of Americas and Africa. The reason east-west spread is easier is because of the relatively similar climate and day cycles.
And so the relative ease of spreading crops and livestock in Eurasia gave its inhabitants a huge advantage. Not only that but Eurasia has a better selection of domesticable crops and animals, by sheer luck, and therefore farming was a more competitive alternative than hunting and gathering in that continent.
Eurasians domesticated pigs, cattle, horses, and sheep, all gave tremendous benefits in terms of providing protein, muscle power, and transportation. Additionally, living in proximity with livestock made them develop resistance to germs that would eventually kill large populations of those they visited.
The reason why the other continents had no or few domesticated animals was because of bad luck, not cultural differences or inferior intellect. The vast majority of species are not domesticatable, with a myriad of different reasons, ranging from aggressiveness, mating behavior, and adherence to dominance hierarchies. And Eurasia has simply a larger selection of mammals and got lucky in the draw.
As for technological innovation, Diamond assures that it's not any genetic superiority behind the reason why it has been the Eurasians that are behind technological progress. Europeans have noted how conservative and uninterested some modern hunter-gatherers are in new technology and presumes they are stupid. However, some tribes ignore technology, while their neighbors quickly adopt it. The Islamic countries were the original hotspot of innovation, and now they're conservative and lagging behind. Europe has also gone through stages of innovation and stagnation. And so the conclusion is that the time at which civilization is ready to embrace new technology is unrelated to geography or genetics, and for the purpose of this book, random.
The book is sometimes criticized for advocating "Environmental determinism" which suggests that culture and people are merely a product of their geographical location. I don't think Diamond is making that case. Instead, the differences in cultures are shaped by idiosyncratic individuals and events in that area, and the environment does not predict economies or historic events, but on the grand scale, through the thousands of years of human history, the environment certainly has had its influence.
In conclusion, the book's thesis makes a lot of sense, and it was interesting to read about the descriptions of primitive people, and how genetic differences in crops and linguistics could be traced to find the degree to which people traveled. Yuval Harari obviously took great inspiration from this book for his well-known "Sapiens," from the way Diamond explains the stages of human civilization and how religion plays a role in uniting larger civilizations.
However, a lot of this large volume was fleshing out in great detail very specific instances defending the thesis. Considering I'm a moron on these matters I take everything Diamond says in good faith and I skimmed several parts of the book due to uninterest. And therefore I'm reluctant to recommend this and I think reading a synopsis would do for the "everyday normal guy."
abhi_sp's review against another edition
4.0
As his critics , Diamond tries to bend the truth to make it seem as if everything can be explained by geography . He's wrong there tho. While geography and environmental factors do matter enormously , so do cultural, social and political factors which many times evolve mostly independent of environmental factors.
Nevertheless he shows really strong , eye opening evidence as to how important environment and geography are to the development of human societies . How it has held back most of Sub-Saharan Africa , Oceania and the pre-columbian Americas as well retarding the growth of civilizations in the old world in regions like mainland and maritime south east asia.
Nevertheless he shows really strong , eye opening evidence as to how important environment and geography are to the development of human societies . How it has held back most of Sub-Saharan Africa , Oceania and the pre-columbian Americas as well retarding the growth of civilizations in the old world in regions like mainland and maritime south east asia.
tempest_arising's review against another edition
I didn’t have any issues with it, actually. I was just expecting something about epidemics and biology, not culture and ethnicity.
alexeysidoruk's review against another edition
4.0
Very good book but I definitely expected more - maybe time and dissemination of information have made some part of the book too obvious. The chapter on the writing is confusing in many aspects.