È un libro che, dopo averlo finito, ti fa sentire un po' più colto.
Che poi è quello che un saggio dovrebbe fare.
L'argomento, perchè alcune civiltà sono più ricche e tecnologicamente avanzate di altre, mi interessava molto, quindi non ho sofferto più di tanto le ripetizioni, che comunque ci sono, e che, se vanno bene per esempio in un corso universitario, finiscono per appesantire un testo di divulgazione.
La tesi di Jared Diamond è che le diversità culturali non siano innate, ma dipendano da differenze geografiche, ecologiche e territoriali sostanzialmente legate al caso.
Non essendo un antropologa non posso dire quanto sia scientificamente fondato quello che dice Diamond, ma quasi tutto quello che dice mi sembra ben giustificato da prove e logica. Ho detto quasi perchè se il discorso mi sembra filare perfettamente quando parla di preistoria e civiltà antiche, mi pare che quando faccia riferimento alla storia più recente (es. conquista delle Americhe e gara per il predominio tra Europa e Cina) il tutto sia un po' troppo semplicistico e deterministico.
Comunque, un ottimo saggio, comprensibile a chiunque. Interessanti soprattutto i capitoli dedicati alla nascita dell'agricoltura e all'addomesticamento degli animali. Se vi siete mai chiesti perchèabbiamo addomesticato il cavallo, ma non la zebra, che pure sembra somigliargli così tanto, qui troverete la risposta.

همیشه برایم سوال بوده مثلا چطور می‌توانیم نژادپرست نباشیم؟ آیا این کار نیاز به آموزش خاصی دارد؟ یعنی اطلاعاتی، داده های علمی ای چیزی به ما داده شود تا دست از نژادپرستی برداریم یا نه کافی ست آدم به احساسات خالصش رجوع کند چرا که احساس آدم زیر بار تبعیض بین انسان ها نمی رود؟

با خواندن این کتاب فهمیدم نه، خود احساس هم تابع دانش و اعتقادی است که در سر داریم. این که بدانی شاید علت این که کهن ترین تمدن ها در آسیا شکل گرفته، وجود گندم و جو برای کشت و گوسفند و بز برای دامداری بوده که در جاهای دیگر امکان آن نبوده و یا علت انتقال این تمدن های بزرگ به اروپا و نه آفریقا و اقیانوسیه و آمریکای سرخپوست ها، شرایط جغرافیایی خاص اروپا بوده نه چیز دیگری، باعث می شود به مرزبندی های فرهنگی و بالا و پایین های دروغی شک کنی و احساساتت نسبت به انسان ها دگرگون شود. بدانی نه تمدن ها ( با ستایش همه ی شگفتی های انسانی و البته مذمت فجایع بزرگشان) و نه زندگی های نخستین به خودی خود اصالت ندارند. این مجموعه ی رنگین فرهنگ انسانی، حاصل تلاش نفسگیر گروه های انسانی برای زندگی روی کره زمین ( چه زندگی معنوی چه زندگی مادی) با توجه به امکانات و شرایط ویژه ی زمان و مکان هرکدام از آن ها و تاثیر متقابل این تلاش ها و شرایط بوده است.

این کتاب در حقیقت تاریخ 6 میلیون سال زندگی خانواده ی انسان بر روی کره ی زمین است (فارغ از ارزش گذاری). خانواده ای که شاید از آفریقا پا گرفتند. به صبوری ِ چند هزار قرن، در جست و جوی زندگی نو در تمامی زمین پخش شدند، در آسیا و آفریقا تمدن تشکیل دادند، بر طبیعت ویژه ی سیبری و اقیانوسیه منطبق شدند، خود را به جزایر دوردست اقیانوس و آمریکا رساندند و در اروپا نظم جدید کره ی زمین را رقم زدند. من بنا بر علاقه ام، هنر را اولویت زندگی ام قرار داده ام ولی به نظرم لازم است کنار صدسال تنهایی مارکز، کتاب هایی از این دست را هم خواند.این کتاب هم داستانی دیگر است. داستان 6 میلیون سال تنهایی انسان روی کره ی زمین

“In short, Europe’s colonization of Africa had nothing to do with differences between European and African peoples themselves, as white racists assume. Rather, it was due to accidents of geography and biogeography—in particular, to the continents’ different areas, axes, and suites of wild plant and animal species. That is, the different historical trajectories of Africa and Europe stem ultimately from differences in real estate.”
- Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs, and Steel



This is one of those books that once you finish, you sit back and say "yeah, um, duh". Since I'm reading this about 18 years after it was first published and probably 14 years since I bought and first perused it, it never seemed very shocking to me. Look, certain civilizations came to dominate based on a couple random, accidental, and nonracially-based situations that combined to give the Eurasian people a slight advantage once these civilizations came into contact with each other.

First, the domesticated food and animals of Eurasiaa contained more protein and more varieties of domesticated animals (pigs, cows, goats, etc) that allowed the people on the Eurasian continent to achieve a certain population density that allowed them to move from band > tribe > chiefdom > state > empire first. This density also allowed for more technological advances, more exposure and protection against herd diseases, so that when cultures collided, the more advanced societies were able to dominate. End of book. Q.E.D.

Is it still worth reading? Certainly. Just because you get the basic premise of Natural Selection does not mean you shouldn't read Darwin's classics. I'm not comparing Jared Diamond to Charles Darwin. This book isn't that good, but the apparent simplicity of the book's premise only appears simple. The argument that Diamond delivers is tight and simple but hides a lot of work.

This is an ambitious book. It seeks to provide a simple rationale to explain why inequalities exist between the peoples of the world. What makes its approach fresh is that the analysis is from someone who is neither an economist nor a historian. Broadly speaking, Diamond pulls this off. His style is readable and his arguments well laid out. His conclusions about the importance in early human history of having the right plants and animals to promote the vital first step for a civilisation – that of developing farming, is compelling. I was also particularly impressed by his view that the orientation of a continent can foster or hinder the spread of farming, a point I had never considered.
The book’s strength is also it weakness. Jared Diamond is very good on his own ground, and so long as his narrative is based on his knowledge of anthropology, biology and geography, all is well. Once the book approaches our own times, however, his arguments become stretched. When more complicated historical, social and economic factors need explanation, his narrative becomes less convincing. That said, this is still an excellent, thought-provoking read.

This book reads like an earnest school essay, written with the obliviousness of someone who's so absorbed in proving their premise that they abandon entertainment along the way. I thought the yawnfest on agriculture would never end.

This book that reads like a transcript for a documentary, analyzing why some civilizations flourished and others did not in all of human history. It is well-written and well-organized. Diamond examines such topics as the development of agriculture, domestication of animals, geographical location, the surrounding environment, proliferation of languages, transmission of diseases, and so much more. To fully appreciate this book, I think it requires a strong interest in sociology, anthropology, history, biology, archeology, or, preferably, a combination of many of these areas. It contains a wealth of information and is conveyed in an impartial manner. Diamond makes a compelling case against the various rationales that have been used to justify racism. I found it fascinating.

I give this book 4 stars because it has some very interesting ideas that provoke thought and inquiry. It also offers plausible explanations that often ring true. I don't give it 5 stars because it suffers from certain drawbacks.

I love his analysis and interpretation of causes that show why civilization arose variously in diverse and distinct locations of the planet. I love how his causes make sense. His rejection of race-based politics is quite clear. I like
how his explanations lead us to reexamine patriotism, nationality, group affiliation, judgment of other cultures... There is definitely a lot to learn and what better way to learn than from someone who loves to learn/teach by
engaging.

Contrary to another reader on goodreads, I couldn't wait to get to the "around the world" chapters. That is what the book was building towards in my opinion. Towards explaining why the world today looks like it does.

Jared Diamond is not much into referencing materials which is strange given that he is an academic. One could claim that this book is written for a wider audience and is meant to be more approachable and if so, Diamond makes some very bald statements which are very hard to substantiate in the absence of citations. For instance, his claim that the hard sciences look down upon softer sciences like history. I heard similar claims in graduate school. But where is the evidence for such claims and should they be taken seriously if there isn't supporting scientific evidence for it? I don't doubt that such evidence may exist if he makes the statement but I have a hard time as a reader who needs more proof. He makes a similar bald assertion towards the front of the book about the prevalence of race-based explanations for differences in development which again I know exist based on similar conversations but which I would never take seriously anyway, unless someone could show it to me using science.

There is a lot of redundancy in the book. The four major causes are drummed, driven and pummeled into one. A different organization of the book could have lead to less redundancy and more salient communication of points. That said, he does still get his points across. Lovely pictures in the book. The maps and tables are a little thin on resources but the author tries to provide a reading list toward the end of the book for each chapter.

The PBS show based on his book more pithily stated and demonstrated the unequal distribution of material wealth, health and resources around the globe and made clear who has benefited and at whose expense. It is not very often that any westerner, let alone an academic has so openly shown through their work how viciously parts of the human race have treated certain other parts of it. His book does make me want to go further back and look also at what lead to racial distinctions in the first place.

In the new edition of the book, there is an especially interesting chapter on Japan and the Japanese people and language and how they might be Korean in ethnicity. This may not go down well with a Japanese audience with their extreme nationalism and their emphasis on superiority over neighboring cultures. However, it is perfectly plausible and a fascinating read.

--
www.aprilandradsdiablog.blogspot.com

An intriguing book. Regardless of whether its arguments are right or wrong, the book provides profound knowledge of human history and civilizations. A vast amount of information is presented neatly, that helps a layman like me to follow and capture the data better. I, considering myself to have no interest in all kinds of history (consequence of Vietnam's education system, but not only the problem of Vietnam to be precise), astonishingly found the book absorbing and thought - provoking. In addition, the author offers encouragement to the people in their efforts to write a brighter history for their homelands, as he implies that all the people on this planet have equal potency to shape the future of their regions.

Nonetheless, the book mostly refers to the mainstream theories in human immigration and neglecting other hypothesis, which may mislead the reader into presuming that what mentioned is the only truth. Besides, it analyses human history based on geographical regions (Europe, Asia and North Africa to be Eurasia), failing to meet the reader's expectation in figuring out what made western countries dominate the world today (he did explain it at the end of the book, but it was not satisfying).

Anyway, I like the book and the author's writing style. Reading it when there was tension between China and Vietnam regarding the oil rig gambit. A thought struck me that human came a long way to reach this stage and here we are fighting and killing each other. Stop that nationalism. It's all bullshit.

Καταπληκτικό βιβλίο. Με λεπτομέρειες και επιστημονική ακρίβεια.

A quick take:
Not an easy read by any measure. It does deal with a lot of hardcore, sometimes too dry, but mostly interesting, archaeological/anthropological/biological/genetical/historical/cultural/geographical/economical/technological developments, facts and insights through which Diamond propounds his basic argument: why did human development proceed in such different rates on different continents; why certain societies/countries/regions became disproportionately powerful and innovative (while others lagged behind)
Starting with human evolution; geological transformation making inroads with development of civilizations; domestication of plants and animals; food production; reasons for growth in population in some regions while others seeing deaths in large numbers, owning to susceptibility to particular germs;
leading to factors behind the victory of particular regions/countries/ (race?) over others, this book indeed is an intensive read in terms of research and information.
I need a second or third read to fully comprehend the finer points of Diamond's "whirlwind tour" nearly 13,000 years of history of almost everybody, but not anytime soon though...

I have this awesome picture in my head in which Jared Diamond did not write this book. He instead wrote a detailed, engaging account of the history of plant and animal domestication.

"But Rhiannon," you might say, "doesn't that remove his entire thesis, that geography determined just about everything about the course of human civilization?"

And, I would respond yes, it does.

"And, isn't that kind of removing the whole book?"

No, I counter. It just removes the douche-y social Darwinist parts. Plus, if he weren't trying to prove an overarching point about the entirety of human history, readers wouldn't be subjected to his style of argument, which largely consists of applying only certain parts of his thesis at certain points (see his arguments regarding the lengths of human habitation of North American versus how those same arguments are applied regarding Africa), waving away pieces of evidence that would call his thesis into question, and neglecting to include any citations, instead relying on a "Further Reading" section. Removing all of this would leave the only parts really worth reading: the stuff about plant and animal domestication. Which was awesome.

Having read Charles C. Mann's 1491 immediately before Guns, Germs, and Steel, I was all-too aware of the dated nature of many of Diamond's assumptions about the New World. (And therefore I would highly recommend 1491 to anyone interested in learning about the latest and greatest developments in knowledge concerning the early history of the Americas.) This seed of doubt concerning the accuracy of Diamond's assumptions about the Americas prevented me from fully appreciating what he had to say about the histories of the other continents, of which I am even less familiar.

True, the theories promoted in Diamond's book are not disrupted by the accuracy of details concerning the peoples and societies under discussion, but this raises another concern for me: the theories are so generalized, they don't suffer for the potential inaccuracy of described events. In other words, instead of starting with objective histories (and or/references to ongoing research into such histories), the book starts with a central premise and cites historical examples to support that theory.

The central theory may be summarized as follows:
* People with agriculture can produce food surpluses
* Food surpluses can support larger populations
* People located in geographical areas with animals to domesticate were able to use such animals for labor as well as meat
* Large populations with food surpluses can support artisans and bureaucrats
* Artisans and bureaucrats lead to more complex social structures and technical innovations (tools, weapons, metallurgy)
* Dense populations (especially those with domestic animals) contract and evolve immunities to germs and diseases
* Eurasian populations, due to favorable conditions for agriculture and their head-start on many other populations around the globe, acquired the "guns, germs, and steel" to conquer populations lacking the equivalent weaponry, diseases, and technology.

While the central premise makes general sense, I think it's important to acknowledge that it represents a generality, and thus offers an over-simplified view of human history. Considering the fact that this book leans so heavily on theory, I am surprised that book stores typically shelve it in History and Science sections, rather than Philosophy.

After that long disclaimer, I can say that the overall content was interesting. I especially enjoyed the section about the process of domesticating plants and animals. It had never really occurred to me that some plants and animals simply cannot be domesticated, or that the yields of some plants made the domestication of others less desirable or completely unnecessary.