Jim's Reviews > Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies

Guns, Germs and Steel by Jared Diamond

by
198340
's review
Jul 27, 07

Read in January, 2006

The Purist

I give you now Professor Twist,
A conscientious scientist,
Trustees exclaimed, "He never bungles!"
And sent him off to distant jungles.
Camped on a tropic riverside,
One day he missed his loving bride.
She had, the guide informed him later,
Been eaten by an alligator.
Professor Twist could not but smile.
"You mean," he said, "a crocodile."

That bit of Ogden Nash whimsy came into my head as I thought about Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel, a reflection on human history through the lens of evolutionary biology. Diamond, unlike Professor Twist, is seeking answers to real world problems. In this case, he seeks to understand the plight of indigenous peoples and their subordination to European and Asian cultures in light of evolutionary pressures. Even so, Diamond seems awkward in his attempts to justify the ways of the Blind Watchmaker to men as so. One false note comes early in the book, when he departs from his evenhandedness to assure us that not only should we not hold New Guineans to be less intellectually endowed than Europeans (a reasonable enough assumption), but that they are probably intellectually superior. He admits that he can't demonstrate that superiority empirically, so that assertion strikes the reader as an attempt to curry favor by a politically correct reverse bias.

On the other hand, there's a lot of really stimulating and interesting stuff in this book. Diamond talks about: what kinds of foodstuffs are necessary to support civilization; why disease almost always flowed from native Europeans to native Americans (and not vice-versa), whereas Europeans encounter many new diseases when they attempted to enter Africa; why those previous two topics are related; how innovation happens; etc. It seems like there's an interesting fact or point of view whenever you turn the page.

The book seeks a complete explanation for the course of human history. It has that sort of broad, sweeping intellectual appeal that a hefty work of philosophy or science has. For example, after someone learns Newtonian mechanics, he tends to see the entire universe as the interplay between physical forces that are expressed in terms of differential equations. A similar dynamic happens here, where the reader suddenly sees commonplaces in a new light.

As with most grand theories, it's important to see that there are some important limits to the analysis. While we can see why, in broad strokes, European and Asian peoples might have overwhelming advantages in human history in purely biological and geographical terms, Diamond's analysis is of no help in answering historical questions that still might strike us as large, but come within the realm of European or Asian culture, instead of at the border with other peoples. For example, it's hard to see how his analysis adds anything to our understand of conflicts such as the Greco-Persian wars, the rise and decline of Rome, the Napoleonic Wars, or the American Civil War. Certainly these questions are important, and we rightly inquire into agricultural, military, political, and culture causes for these events. In these cases Diamond's analysis is largely impossible, since we are dealing with peoples that share genetics, foodstuffs, climates, terrains, etc.

Perhaps I'm nit-picking. It's an excellent, thought-provoking book. I'd just like to temper the inevitable temptation to view all history through this lens.

Sign into Goodreads to see if any of your friends have read Guns, Germs and Steel.
sign in »

Comments (showing 1-4 of 4) (4 new)

dateDown_arrow    newest »

Justin I have to disagree with you. It's NOT reasonable to assume that New Guineans have less intellectual prowess than other people. In fact, that's all Diamond is really saying. He's really only bringing it up because that's kind of what the entire book is about, that Europeans didn't conquer indigenous people's because of how smart they were. He offers it only as a possibility for arguments sake. He's simply asking the reader to remove their bias by considering something that may or may not be true.

The rise and decline of Rome, the Napoleonic Wars, etc. are far beyond the scope of this book. In fact, they have little, if anything, to do with the thesis of the book. While they may be important to human history, or just plain interesting in their own right, this book is about why Europeans conquered other people, not why or how they conquered themselves. Jared Diamond has another book (Collapse) where he does deal with the decline of particular people's without the outside influence of Europeans that may be more salient.


Nicole The reason I started reading Diamond's Guns, Germs, And Steel was because my whole English course revolves around it. However, I think reading this book is a learning experience, beyond that of university writing and research.
I am not finished reading, but there has only been one part so far that made me frown, and reread several times to understand what Diamond was trying to say. It's a sensitive subject, but I have to say that I had the same opinion, Berrittini. Not to be mistaken, I do not think it should be assumed that because of how history played out that any people should be placed above another. Diamond admitted there is no true method to determine intelligence beyond that of what we have learned, yet he used factors that I feel had not much more significance than the ones he had dismissed.
I appreciate this book because of the intellectual and moral gap it is attempting to fill. I might also be nitpicking, because I felt he was trying to counter a bias by asserting another one (if that makes any sense). Diamond is very thorough about a very broad subject, and too often we focus too much on the Europeans. It does not answer much about the infighting in Europe, but at least explains why everyone developed so differently.


Jenna I appreciate reading these comments about this book. It is very refreshing. I am reading it for the second time (first as a student in a world history class and now as a teaching assistant in that same course). The first time I read it I was a freshman or sophomore and soaked up everything it said. I'm afraid this is how a lot of people read this book. However, this time I have more of a critical eye and I am reading it much closer. For me it is still valuable even though there may be some issues with his arguments and his one answer to solve all ancient history questions ignores some important issues is a bit bothersome. What this book does is open up the discussion to new ideas and fight against some scary beliefs that are still held by a lot of people. Guns, Germs, and Steel has really gotten people talking and thinking and arguing which is great and what any good book should do. This book is not the authority on the subject and should not be the only book an individual reads about this era if they really want to understand what happened, but I think it should definitely be a part of everyone's library!


message 4: by Jim (new) - rated it 5 stars

Jim Justin wrote: "I have to disagree with you. It's NOT reasonable to assume that New Guineans have less intellectual prowess than other people. In fact, that's all Diamond is really saying. He's really only brin..."

Sorry for the ambiguity. My intent was to say that it reasonable to assume that New Guineans have no less native intellectual prowess than Europeans.


back to top