Korean Job Discussion Forums

[Qinella]

Anyone read this book? I just picked it up last week and, though I'm only 100 pages in, I've found it fascinating.

For those who have read it, or who may otherwise be informed on the topic of differing rates of development in human societies, I have a question. The first and second chapters of the book talk about Polynesian societies and how the resources available there had drastic effects on which groups eventually conquered the other.

A key example given was the Moriori of the Chathams and the Maori of New Zealand. Diamond says that the Maori had the benefit of being able to grow crops and thereby free up human resources to other activities, such as military and technology ventures. The Moriori, by contrast, did not live on land suitable for farming, and thus had to remain hunter-gatherers. The end result was that the Maori had superior weapons and were able to rout the Moriori rather effortlessly.

This makes sense to me. However, what stands out in my mind is the situation in the Americas. In North America, which has been inhabited far longer than Polynesia has been, the people remained, by and large, hunter-gatherers. In Central and South America, however, which were inhabited later than North America, people created settlements which were so great they are still known today.

First question: why this difference in development in the Americas?

Second question: why were the agricultural civilizations of Central and South America unable to produce better weapons, armor, and technology?


Perhaps the answers come later in the book, but as of now I'm confused about these things. Why were the civilizations so dependent upon stone rather than metals? Are strong ores not available in that region? The book does not say.


Any other issues you'd like to bring up about the book, I'd be glad to discuss.

[Paji eh Wong]

I read Guns, Germs, and Steel a few years ago, Collapse much more recently. Both are excellent, exhaustive books. Diamond is a master of his perspective and of what he does. The amount of research he must of done for those books is staggering.

To put GG&S into context, you have to understand that Diamond wrote it as a response to The Bell Curve by Murray and Hernstien. Essentially, The Bell Curve said that intellegence is largely genetic, differs among ethnicities, and is essential for social success in life. I haven't read the book but it smacks of eugenics to me. Anyway, GG&S was an attempt to show how environmental constraints shaped different cultures, and thus explains the balance of power between different cultures.

You've already hit on what bugs me about Diamond's books. He is so thoroughly engrossed in the materialistic paradigm that he fails to take idealism, the idea that our ideas matter, into account. Thus, I don't think he can claim that his books are as comprehensive as what I see his intellectual ambitions being. Does this make sense?

Don't let that stop you. The guy writes great books. Have fun.

[Ya-ta Boy]

Excellent book.

[JMO]

[Qinella]

Paji eh Wong:

Yeah that makes sense to me. I don't know, though, if it's possible for one person to examine both material and ideological factors, simply because the latter part is so complex, and also less easily studied than physical things that one person would never have time to master both fields of study (since both are already interdisciplinary). We can see the tools and buildings left behind, but it's not so clear exactly what the people believed and what were their ideologies.

You know, I'm curious about why I'm just hearing about this book, and why it's suddenly so popular. It's been out for 10 years already? The reason I bought it is because I've heard numerous people mention it in the past few months. I went to the bookstore and they had it out on the new release table.

[Qinella]

Thanks for the recommendation JMO. Sounds interesting.

[Paji eh Wong]

[blynch]

qinella, another beautiful and compelling writing. so many sentences perfectly woven together, are carrying your righteousness right into the heart of everyone with a brain. how come i can only write no more than three sentences of gibberish at a time?

[mindmetoo]

Excellent book. I like how he goes into how the distribution of animals basically led to the rise of advanced civilizations. Tigers don't make good farm animals. Cows do. Asia got the lion share of the animals that lend themselves easiest to domestication. Cows, chickens, horses, pigs. They do work, provide food, and fight wars.

[Old fat expat]

Not a bad book but I really didn't understand why it was so highly rated.

Something that bugged me was his conclusion that some tribes he encountered were more intelligent than Western groups because they had a greater classification of all the plants in their environment. Struck me as odd at the time that (a) he was making a case for superiority by one group over others, and (b) botony being a somewhat arbitrary measure.

Environment makes a big impact but it is only one variable. Because of that the book seemed a little one dimensional and linear. I think things may be a little more complex (multi-variate).

[Qinella]

Blynch, you taking the piss man? Hehe..

[Paji eh Wong]

[oneiros]

GG&S is one of those books that makes you feel silly for not having realized certain things before, like the whole issue of having plant or animal species that are easily domesticated. That's probably what I liked about it the most. Also, he explained where cows came from, which was an issue that had been plaguing me for some time.

Hadn't heard about Collapse before. Cool. Will add it to the giant pile of things I currently want to read.

[captain kirk]

Excellent, so smoothly the author opens up the life story of earth's early cultures/technological advances, and how a culture's success was dependent on resources (crop types from local, wild hybrids that were, and weren't suitable). Collapse is great, too. My favourite part in Collapse is the discussion of Easter Island, vivid description of a vanished culture that cut down ALL the forests, and killed each other off in squabbling before the Westerners arrived in the 17OO's. Last time I was at Whatthebook there were a lot of paperback copies of Collapse, discounted.

[demaratus]

I lke Jared Diamond's way of thinking and approaching the topic of GG&S. I haven't read Collapse, but I will eventually get to it. One problem I have with his argument though, is that he really minimizes human ingenuity and certain cultures ability to do this better than others. It is undeniable that the factors which Diamond attributes to "progress" of certain civilizations are significant. But the peoples thinking (collective mindset), cultures and values of those people can't be ignored entirely as a determining factor in their own outcomes. For example the closed culture of many 18th-29th century asian nations. China, Korea, Japan and others suffered greatly economically and technologically because of this. Japan, then changed its collective mindset and opened itself and its culture (somewhat) and modernized extensively without selling out is asian values and japanese culture. It adapted, and advanced not because of any of Diamonds factors. Subsequently many nations with the potential to become world powers (using Diamonds criteria) either never did or their power was short lived.

His bok is great, well researched and very interesting. His argument is also very relevant. But it is not perfect, far from it, and minimizes the impact of of culture as a factor in development of societies.