Added: Princess Taplin - Date: 15.02.2022 22:02 - Views: 42490 - Clicks: 6708
Frankly, I have no idea how he became so well known or popular in anthropology at all. I left grad school in without ever having heard of the ostensibly populist "scientist. So, please tell me, what anthro programs are teaching this guy? I do, and he's viewed as pretty much a joke by anyone in the history field as well. The issue isn't what he suggests, but the way he draws conclusions and makes connections without any real scientific basis bothers me.
He's certainly free to write his books and put his opinions forth, but they're just that: opinions, with little to no solid evidence backing them apart from the conclusions he himself draws.
A great deal of progress has been made in both history and anthropology as a result of speculation, but in the end he amounts to the equivalent of those guys talking about druids on the history channel. There are 2 primary beefs I've seen leveled against him by anthropologists:.
Instead, Fuck jared diamond tends to cite historians or biologists, and this really seems to grate a huge majority in the profession the wrong way. IMO, this is a merited complaint, but it is often hyper-fixated upon by egotistical anthropologists who are pushing for greater recognition for their field--quite the contradiction considering Diamond exposes a lot of people to the idea of anthropology in the first place. At best, this marginalizes various peoples' cultural evolution.
At its worst, it can carry a current of racist undertones. He ased us a few of his critiques during a cultural geography course and was very poise in discussing his criticisms. I understand people's complaints, but fuck I wish everyone could take a class with that man. Yeah he romanticizes culture - how do you think he sold millions and millions of books to a very broad public demographic?
That still makes him no authority to speak of "culture"--whatever that means. What did he say about his criticisms?
I had read GGS and loved it, but it was my first introduction to anything anthropological. Fuck jared diamond can't read anything beyond the first of the linked article, but the writer calling JD racist is way over the top. He went out of his way in that book to say that race had nothing to do with it. I've read three books by JD and enjoyed them all, but don't have anything to compare him against. I'm taking my first anthropology course in the fall.
Would love to hear some valid criticisms. Here's an askhistorians post regarding some issues that anthropologists in particular take with Guns, Germs and Steel. Here's a short, balanced critique from the same sub. I wouldn't call him a racist in the hateful sense. I would say he's just a bit naive and patronizing in a way that makes me cringe. Kind of like when my grandfather says whites are better at managing their time because they had to plant crops in distinct seasons.
Apart from slighting the anthropologists, I also get the sense that he really doesn't understand political history to any depth.
Personally, I suspect what gave the Europeans vast empires was mostly command of the sea which was a reaction to a Muslim stranglehold on the silk roadand the monopoly of global trade networks that afforded, not their plague hardened DNA or their muscular brain power, having overcome the challenges by how to ground wheat, as Diamond absurdly suggests. His arguments really hearken back to colonial racial superiority arguments used as misdirection when justifying the inequitable treatment that any monopolist is bound to apply.
My workplace has pretty extensive subscriptions to journal sites but this one is still paywalled. I wonder why the editors at 'Capitalism Nature Socialism' agreed to that - from the name of their journal, it seems like they would be open access.
I took one thing from guns germs and steel.
Technological development is all about location location location. Access to better dometicatable plants, and animals. Larger horizontal shared climates for multiple societies to develop. What about that is incorrect? So what's the consensus on his book "Collapse"? I haven't read GGS, but collapse was an interesting read a few years ago. It's actually the book that got me really interested in history. Collapse is probably the book that turned me on Diamond. In the first chapter he writes about Easter Island and describes how they committed "eco-cide" eventually resorting to cannibalism.
It only took me about a day of reading the original captains' logs first European captains to the island, over about years to determine that it was the disease and slavery that wiped out the Rapa Nui, not their own over exploitation of the island's resources. Even the stories of cannibalism were isolated to a single Catholic priest's letters, which I believe were written even before he arrived there. His obvious bias and leading of the reader meant I could never trust his work academically again.
I learned the hard way to never mention Diamond to an anthropologist. The guy nerd raged for several minutes, the smart folk around me made themselves scarce the second I said "Jared". Fuck jared diamond followed me when I excused myself to get a beer, all the while talking about what he thought of the author.
Found the internet! Posted by 6 years ago. Sort by: best. Continue this thread. He's a great writer and a brilliant public communicator. There are 2 primary beefs I've seen leveled against him by anthropologists: 1: Diamond rarely cites anthropologists. Hope that Fuck jared diamond He's the Malcolm Gladwell of anthropology. Jared Diamond's an alright guy. More posts from the Anthropology community. A storehouse of linguistic, archaeological, cultural and biological anthropology information. Created Jul 22, Top posts may 19th Top posts of may, Top posts Back to Top.Fuck jared diamond
email: [email protected] - phone:(308) 683-2738 x 6952