The book is well written and well explained Jared Diamond actually takes real pain to explain that his theories are not implacable and must not be taken as a 100% reliable blueprint for predicting success or failure of any civilization (even if we could actually define what "failure" means for a civilization). How accurate, well-supported, and well-regarded is this book? There are other factors, but it's at least a well-written book, and superficially plausible.
Wheat is a better grain than corn, in terms of nutrition supplied per unit effort. Eurasia extends more east-west, and America more north-south, as does Africa. It's easier for a civilization to expand in a roughly east-west direction than a north-south direction, since climate is more similar east-to-west (an example would be the lack of horses in South Africa until imported by sea, since they couldn't go by land through the tse-tse fly zone). Diamond places great importance on diseases in human development, and likens the results of making contact with a more diseased civilization to being digested. This had advantage for animal-powered farming and transportation, as well as infecting the Eurasians with numerous diseases the Americans had no resistance to. In Eurasia, there were several large domesticated animals, including the cow and horse. It has several explanations for the development of Eurasian civilization rather than American civilization. Jared Diamond wrote a fascinating book that purports to explain, in a very broad way, the development of civilization.
0 kommentar(er)
