J
johnnyt3000
Guest
Did any of you read the book, Guns, Germs, and Steel? If so, what did you think about it?
- Status
E
EllisWoods
Guest
I read it years ago and remember it being a fascinating analysis. Highly recommended.
L
Lion_of_Narnia
Guest
Jared Diamond makes some good points but he’s too much a geographical determinist… He’s also rather academically anti-western, so much so he says that indigenous Indonesian peoples are innately more intelligent than average Westerners (using the ludicrous example of plopping a westerner in a Indonesian jungle and asking him or her to find food. Why not plop a tribal Indonesian in a WalMart and ask him to find a plumber’s snake and determine his intelligence from that???)
What his thesis can’t explain is why cultures that also have the same geographical advantages the West supposedly has, did not do the critical things that put the West on top (science, evidence-based medicine, commerce networks largely independent of state control, a technological mindset also independent from state control, even Universities).
Lord Alfred Northhead spoke of the West’s critical differences in these areas 70 years ago and actually placed the prime responsibility on the fact the West was Christendom–a claim that Northhead’s friend and collaborator Bertrand Russell found infuriating but had no adequate refutation to.
Read the works of Rodney Stark, especially (How the West won
What his thesis can’t explain is why cultures that also have the same geographical advantages the West supposedly has, did not do the critical things that put the West on top (science, evidence-based medicine, commerce networks largely independent of state control, a technological mindset also independent from state control, even Universities).
Lord Alfred Northhead spoke of the West’s critical differences in these areas 70 years ago and actually placed the prime responsibility on the fact the West was Christendom–a claim that Northhead’s friend and collaborator Bertrand Russell found infuriating but had no adequate refutation to.
Read the works of Rodney Stark, especially (How the West won
K
kalt
Guest
I read it years ago, but I liked it. I agree with the previous response on the author’s tribesman/Westerner evaluation. I thought it was so much noble savage drivel, which is insulting to both sides.
My conclusion was that the author liked himself very, very much.
But I did enjoy the book.
My conclusion was that the author liked himself very, very much.
But I did enjoy the book.
8
808Catholic
Guest
Read the book and thought the analysis was very provocative. The question that remains with me is “is decision making in today’s culture the same as years gone by.” Faced with the same scenarios raised in the book, will we make decisions based on what we’ve learned from the past or will we come up with a new mental calculus and arrive at a totally different solution and strategy.
D
didymus
Guest
I don’t know about determinist but he makes a good case that geography plays a critical role.
As for your Indonesian a Wal-Mart, no he couldn’t find the plumber’s snake. but if you showed him how pipes work and one became clogged I bet he would look for something flexible to poke into it.
As for tribesmen being more intelligent, maybe. With technology we have developed crutches for our brains, starting with literacy. Members of non-literate cultures which we usually think of as inferior carry complete encyclopedias in their heads, family histories, religious lore, local fauna and flora, &c. We just Google.
I think the key here is state control. China is often cited as invented this or that first. True, they invented mechanical clocks, but they were not developed. Europe, unlike China, was a collection of competing mini-states all competing to make the biggest, best, most complicated church bells. Like wise gunpowder, in China it was used for fireworks, in Europe for war, though I don’t know if that should be a point of pride.
The role of the Church, I think was important but not primary. We all owe a debt to the Church for preserving knowledge and founding universities but it also fostered a reverence for the ancients like Aristotle that held things back.
Btw, why is being anti-Western necessarily bad? There’s a lot to be anti-Western about.
L
Lion_of_Narnia
Guest
I
As for tribesmen being more intelligent, maybe. With technology we have developed crutches for our brains, starting with literacy. Members of non-literate cultures which we usually think of as inferior carry complete encyclopedias in their heads, family histories, religious lore, local fauna and flora, &c. We just Google.
But its not a matter of biology, but culture. Raise an Borneo kid in San Jose and he’ll be wasting his time on Twitter, et al…
I think the key here is state control. China is often cited as invented this or that first. True, they invented mechanical clocks, but they were not developed. Europe, unlike China, was a collection of competing mini-states all competing to make the biggest, best, most complicated church bells. Like wise gunpowder, in China it was used for fireworks, in Europe for war, though I don’t know if that should be a point of pride.
The role of the Church, I think was important but not primary. We all owe a debt to the Church for preserving knowledge and founding universities but it also fostered a reverence for the ancients like Aristotle that held things back.
The Chinese culture GAVE the control to the state, expressed through the Mandarins. Time and again, industry and innovation was suppressed, since they had already found “the way of Heaven” and they didn’t want anything upsetting the status quo. The vicious dynastic wars were bad enough, the Mongols were bad enough, but “the Tao” was a means of forcing the new rulers back into the “same-old same old”
Btw, why is being anti-Western necessarily bad? There’s a lot to be anti-Western about.
Its a matter of comparison. We were the only culture that multiple times did away with slavery, we were the only culture, via those church sponsored universities (and the monestaries) LIKED innovation and critical thought. The influence of Aristotle actually came to a height during the Counter-Reformation as a reaction to Protestantism and NOT during the Middle ages (see Stark on this)
As for tribesmen being more intelligent, maybe. With technology we have developed crutches for our brains, starting with literacy. Members of non-literate cultures which we usually think of as inferior carry complete encyclopedias in their heads, family histories, religious lore, local fauna and flora, &c. We just Google.
But its not a matter of biology, but culture. Raise an Borneo kid in San Jose and he’ll be wasting his time on Twitter, et al…
I think the key here is state control. China is often cited as invented this or that first. True, they invented mechanical clocks, but they were not developed. Europe, unlike China, was a collection of competing mini-states all competing to make the biggest, best, most complicated church bells. Like wise gunpowder, in China it was used for fireworks, in Europe for war, though I don’t know if that should be a point of pride.
The role of the Church, I think was important but not primary. We all owe a debt to the Church for preserving knowledge and founding universities but it also fostered a reverence for the ancients like Aristotle that held things back.
The Chinese culture GAVE the control to the state, expressed through the Mandarins. Time and again, industry and innovation was suppressed, since they had already found “the way of Heaven” and they didn’t want anything upsetting the status quo. The vicious dynastic wars were bad enough, the Mongols were bad enough, but “the Tao” was a means of forcing the new rulers back into the “same-old same old”
Btw, why is being anti-Western necessarily bad? There’s a lot to be anti-Western about.
Its a matter of comparison. We were the only culture that multiple times did away with slavery, we were the only culture, via those church sponsored universities (and the monestaries) LIKED innovation and critical thought. The influence of Aristotle actually came to a height during the Counter-Reformation as a reaction to Protestantism and NOT during the Middle ages (see Stark on this)
- Status