Crossposted at Olympia Academy
Yes I am still working on Civilization by Rogers Osborne but I had to read Guns, Germs, and Steel for a book club I belong to.
In Guns, Germs, and Steel Dr. Jared Diamond attempts to explain the causes of the Eurasian dominance of history and he does a pretty compelling job.
Proposing an environmental reason the courses that various societies followed throughout their history Dr. Diamond narrows the reasons to three factors, domesticateble plants, large domesticateble animals, and geography. He dismisses the idea that innate intelligence may have anything to do with the process (although he does propose the idea that native New Guineans are more intelligent than westerner because the constant wars, battle against diseases, and other pitfalls of a primitive society naturally select for higher intelligence. )
Professor Diamond's theory goes like this. In order for an advanced civilization to develop it must domesticate plants and large domestic animals. Of the species that are suitable the vast majority are located in Eurasia (including North Africa). In addition the environment must be geographically suitable. Because of the difference transporting crops and animals from the temperate to tropical areas the most suitable areas for this to happen are aligned along an east-west axis (again Eurasia). No problem so far I have thought along similar lines since high school, long before I knew what geographic determinism was/is.
Once the plants and animals have been domesticated Guns, Germs and Steel postulates that social more complex social organisms can evolve. This is driven by the relative abundance of food which allows specialized artisans, warriors, and bureaucrats, eventually leading to modern societies.
One of the major problems I have with Guns, Germs and Steel is Professor Diamond's dismissal of the idea that technological progress may be driven by harsher living conditions. Instead he dismisses it out of hand and just moves on.
Another is the way he squeezes everything into his theory. Because Eurasia is easy to traverse it allows for the spread domesticated plants, animals, and technology. China however is to easy to traverse so it lacks competition among rival states and stagnates. India is too fragmented and can't develop the cooperation needed to advance. Only Europe has the optimal amount of state fragmentation even though India and China were much more advanced than Europe for hundreds of years.
In addition, although Professor Diamond states that there is no innate difference in intelligence among the races he states that the hunter gatherers of New Guinea are naturally more intelligence because of the natural selection imposed by their environment, while Eurasians are selected for disease resistance at the expense of intelligence. This is because of our close contact with domestic animals and is a fourth major factor in the spread of Eurasian dominance.
My final objection is Professor Diamond's obvious bias against western society. This is obvious in his word choice when describing these societies, such as describing even ancient farming communities as sedentary, implying that the active societies are the hunter-gatherers. This is a minor point but irritating.
No comments:
Post a Comment