Rating: 
Summary: The Dice Rolls Sixes by the Creator Upon Europe
Review: In his brilliant analysis of why European societies and culture were and are dominating the rest of the world, Jared Diamond takes into account numerous empirical evidence through the multi-disciplinary fields of anthropology, biology, etymology, sociology, chemistry, evolutionary psychology and others, to find some concrete answers beyond the rubbish of accounting all of Europe's superiority of recent years to genetic IQ and skin color.Starting with carbon dated evidence and historical tracings of domesticable plants and foods, Diamond lays out the factors necessary for a large, sedentary population to develop that supports skilled professions through the storage of surplus foods and the appropriate governance necessary for advances through rules established by a legitimate leader. Linked very closely with religion/spiritualness, these rulers certainly added their own unique take and skills to environmental scenarious, but they got to were they are due to the fortunate circumstances of their initial environments. Outlining the necessary transformation and characteristics necessary for a transformation from wild to domesticated plant and animal species and hence the spread of knowledge due to increased competition, trade, and travel aided by the predominant east-west axiz of temperate climate and similar environments that spread from China to Portugal through Eurasia. Unfortunately (fortunately if your on the lucky side), things didn't pan out similarly and fall into place so that advanced civilization could be created over a vast and spreading area over other parts of the globe. This didn't occur because of something lacking in the inventiveness, drive, ambition, and ingenuity of homo sapiens from different parts of the globe, but from a lack of adequate environmental, climatological, and biological resources available. This book is a bit tedious at times, because it applied it's methodology to other parts of the globe, which is both repetative and necessary to establish consistency, but it still gives you a unique and new perspective on viewing the long-term history of the world and the future evolution of it. Undoubtedly, humans become specialized in special skills from different parts of the globe and what Diamnond doesn't do is go to the next step of establishing whether genetic differences could have and are still occuring and evolving due to the different environmental schema of people's surroundings. Despite this he combines his examples from real-life findings brilliantly to compose a well-established text for future pondering generations wondering why exactly the engagements of cultures led to a European domination of them circa 1500-2000.
Rating:
Summary: The history of the world from the evolution of man to today
Review: In this very interesting overview of world history, Jared Diamond traces the geographic, biological and intellectual factors that have shaped the world. In attempting to answer the question of why some cultures are sucessful in leaving their mark on the world, while other, equally meritous cultures are engulfed or face extinction, he brings to bear a number of highly interesting, plausable hypotheses. As a layperson, I found the analysis informative and easy to follow, and the ideas very new. The audiobook is just the thing to listen to in the car on a long and boring drive. I recommend it highly to the general reader.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating: answers all the BIG questions
Review: I have just finished this astonishing book and am amazed at how much I learned. It was an easy read full of detail regarding our earth, we people and how through some fundamental random apportioning of resources, different histories for different peoples evolved. His charts and explanations were compelling. He showed no bias, but rather gave us the details of how nature was complicate in creating certain advantages for certain groups. It is significant to get the overall picture in this important time. Highly recommended.
Rating: 
Summary: This is probably the book that has taught me the most...
Review: ..at least when it comes to history and the human development.. If you have ever wondered "Why the societies today are the way they are; some highly advanced while others still very basic?", "Why Africa become black?", "Why the female nomads only have a child every four year" or even "Why haven't the zebra been domesticated?" then "Guns, Germs, and Steel" is the book for you. "Guns, Germs, and Steel" binds the story of mankind, the most recent 13000 years of human existence together in less than 500 pages. Well done! Diamond is not a historian; he explores human prehistory from a scientific standpoint. His theory is that the development of civilization and technology came essentially as a result to four factors; 1) the availability of animals and plants to be domesticated (tough luck if the seeds you had were adapted to a different altitude or longitude that you were on, or if the only animals around were dangerous or not economically feasible to domesticate such as hippopotamus or the koala bear), 2) the ease with which the domestication can be relocated (again, the adaptability of the animals or seeds, going east to west was obviously easier than to go from north to south due to similar climates/altitudes at the same longitude), 3) isolation (transfer of knowledge between countries and continents), and 4) the size of the population (more people, more brains, higher chance of someone coming up with something smart). Diamond's basic thesis does have some validity, although I was often left with the feeling that we were only presented with the information that proved the authors point. By building his arguments backwards from the outcome, Diamond could easily defend his theory. I feel that Diamond ignores too many important issues that really need to be considered, in order to make his theory complete. For instance, the absence of any form of acknowledgment for that *pure luck* ought to have played a significant role in where we ended up, and second, that the author completely eliminates the human factor. For example China chose to isolate itself, thereby loosing the technological advantage it had acquired. That had absolutely nothing to do with geography. By ignoring factors such as the human variables, I believe Diamond has significantly twisted the history of human progress. Having dashed out a fair bit of criticism, I must admit that I enjoyed very much reading this book. Diamond knows a whole lot about a whole lot of things, and while reading this book I had many "Aha! So that's why!!" or "Really? Interesting!!" - moments.. I learned a lot from this book, and I will for sure cite this book in the future! I do recommend it to any reader whom wants to better understand the world we have inherited. Just remember that this book presents us with one side of the coin. A coin has two sides, so has the story of human history and development.
Rating: 
Summary: Wishful thinking...
Review: When I bought this book at my daughter's university bookstore, I was full of high expectations based upon enthusiastic reviews I'd heard on NPR. Very quickly, I was disappointed. First, it seems to me that Jared Diamond cannot write very well. This book lacks style, and demonstrates average writing at best. It would [should] earn just a "C" in any college English course, except Freshman English 101. Second, Diamond's goal seems to have been to present an antithetical approach to history, world social and political development. Fundamentally, he tried to convince his readers that history only occurred as it did, because of serious abuses by those who came out on top. He presents nearly all other societies as intellectual and sociological equals to those that obviously enjoyed much greater success through time. Of course some of what he postulates is valid, but none of it seems new: his scenes change, but old thoughts remain. What is revolutionary about this book is that it offers negative "justifications" for most western societal successes, contrasted to positive "excuses" for nearly all non-western societies that didn't attain vibrancy, success, and longevity. It seems that in the author's mind, unsuccessful societies cannot be blamed for their failures; but successful societies should be blamed for their successes. Diamond's book will appeal to young, nihilistic minds, and to others who long to justify the lack of what is generally termed "progress" (social, intellectual, industrial) by many minority societies around the world. As with many similar flawed presentations, all is not lost. At least this book stimulates the reader to reexamine old conclusions and values, but in the end Diamond's book lacks an intellectual and historical foundation that will stand. Mostly, I think Diamond's work supports pseudo-intellectual ramblings that are driven to elevate the low status of those who have not thrived and succeeded in the modern world. His repeated explanations and justifications for societal "failures" and their lack of "progress" amongst competitors, suggests that Diamond has a general antipathy towards the successful societies in our world and a bleeding heart for those that haven't made it. In sum: this book is somewhat interesting; too long; pretty sophomoric; and, not well written. Those who long for a "politically correct" approach to history, wherein the vanquished become heroes, will love it. I was disappointed and made to wonder how Jared Diamond won a Pulitzer Prize for this effort. Subsequently, I've lost a good bit of respect for the Pulitzer Prize, as it seems that they have come to cherish political correctness more than literary excellence.
Rating:
Summary: Definitely worth reading
Review: I have to admit I've never read any other book on this subject and I found it fascinating. Diamond ignores the ideas that certain cultures advanced because they are intellectually superior than others. In fact it is geograpy that in large part determined the course of history. Diamond attempts to answer questions such as why did Europe conquer the Americas instead of the Americas conquering Europe? And why didn't the Chinese colonize America since they were technologically superior to Europe until the 15th century? If you find either of these questions interesting, then you will find this book interesting. Some of the reviewers suggest this is a boring book. I will agree in one respect that Diamond spent to much of the book writing about New Guinea which I found a bit tedious, but all in all it was an excellent learning experience for me.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating in scope, but hollow analysis
Review: I was very disappointed by the book. Maybe my expectations were too high. Basically, the book reduces human cultural history to a series of accidents: accidents of geography and accidents of biological evolution. The scope of Diamond's argument is wonderful and I applaud his efforts. Diamond surveys 15,000 years of human history in terms of plant, animal and germ evolution. If this is the first time you've seen the way humans are at the mercy of germ mutation, it may take your breath away. On the other hand, Diamond leaves no role for human character to play a part. Perhaps it is hopelessly old fashion to suggest individual responsibility exists, but I think we are asking for an ecological disaster if we abandon all efforts to cultivate it. In summary, I was turned off by the narrow-minded materialism. The book is structured as an apologia from a European biologist to a politician of New Guinea. At the beginning of the book, the author introduces us to Yali, a young politician of New Guinea. The politician asks the author why the 'Europeans' have so much and peoples of New Guinea so little. Time and again, the book returns to this simple question. It might have been interesting to question the premise of Yali's question. Have Europeans really hit the jackpot? Unfortunately, we don't inquire into the nature of jackpots. The only measure of success is power and wealth. Diamond's answer is Darwinian: it was an accident. Europeans just 'happened to be' in the right place at the right time. Geography, weather patterns, and access to species suitable for domestication made European success inevitable. I won't argue that random events play an important role in shaping human history, but Diamond's answer is simply uninformative. It could be summarized as Europeans got lucky because they were lucky. What does that tell us? I can't imagine Yali to taking this answer seriously. If you grew up in New Guinea with European tourists blundering through your village taking photographs and passing out trinkets, would you accept an explanation that it was all an accident? That explanation would only work for the tourist who wants to avoid feeling connected to the people they meet along the way. Maybe that's why the book seems to go on and on and on without coming to a conclusion. Diamond is has no answer for Yali, but hopes to put him to sleep. A far more insightful (and controversial) history of the 'human community' can be found in William McNeill's 'Rise of the West' or 'Plagues and People.' Yali would be well served by adding these to his reading list. Finally, the title of this book is misleading. Germs get a fair amount of attention, but 'guns' and 'steel' go almost unmentioned. According to the index, the term 'gun' gets 8 references during the 400+ page book. The term 'steel' gets only 4 references. Germs get about 80. A title along the lines of 'Geography and Germs: how weather and disease shape human cultures' would have been more accurate.
Rating: 
Summary: Tries to answer a tough question
Review: In Guns, Germs & Steel, Jared Diamond presents a compelling explanation for the divergence in technological development between Eurasian societies and those of Africa, Oceania and the Americas. His central thesis is that environmental factors were the primary driving force in social evolution. This thesis is developed through the examination of a slew of ecological factors such as the various availability of plant and animal species suitable for domestication, as well as geographical factors such as continental size and orientation, and ease of migration. Diamond's motivation is to debunk a racist explanation of history. For that it seems sufficient to cite the different races within Eurasia that have at one point or another "led" in technological and political development within a time frame too short for genetic change to be the explanation. Diamond does not extend his thesis to within Eurasia, but rather gives a brief and rather weak explanation in the epilogue that poor land use caused southwestern Asian societies to lag and accidents of politics did the same for China. Diamond is not the best writer. While necessary, the application of his thesis to each continent comes off as overly repetitious. While this book could not have been written in the 50 pages cited in other reviews, a more compact exposition would have been welcome and perhaps would have left room for a more thorough examination of the differences in societal development within Eurasia. None the less, Guns, Germs & Steel adds greatly to the popular literature on social evolution.
Rating:
Summary: The better kind of history book
Review: Guns, Germs, and Steel is very unlike every history book I had in grade school. Instead of focusing on particular people and events and dates, the author takes a look at civilization as a whole. He argues that certain peoples have achieved greatness or modernity in certain places, not due to anything inherent in those people, but rather due to the environment in which they lived; things such as land mass axis orientation and size, native food and laboring animals available for domestication. According to Diamond, history, as it turned out, is largely a coincidence of certain peoples being in the right place at the right time.
Rating:
Summary: review of the BAD reviews
Review: When I find a book particularly compeling, I prefer to read the reviews that pan the book to see what other people think. I guess I can sum up the 1-star reviews into roughly 3 camps (although of course this summary is biased and not comprehensive): 1) "This book is BORING! Can I go out to play now?" or "He doesn't write well. Why does he keep repeating himself?" 2) Diamond is a PC liberal left-leaning commie pinko who hates white people. Isn't it obvious we're just smarter? 3) Diamond's models can't account for China/Incas/Hitler/Einstein/take your pick of historical event. In my opinion... 1) Criticism 1 is a matter of personal taste, which is what reviews are for, so I guess I can't really comment. 2) Diamond is PC: I find these types of criticism the most annoying. It is a completely empty criticism that is about as helpful as someone saying that Bill Bennett is a Nazi. But some people seem to take offense that Diamond even raises the question of proximal causes of European preeminence. By raising these questions no one is necessarily denigrating European culture or society. In fact, Diamond goes to great lengths to show how displacement and genocide have happened to groups throughout the world throughout history, committed by groups from all parts of the world. I thought he was emphasizing, for good or ill, our common humanity. If suggesting that Europeans have common humanity with everyone else is too demeaning and PC to some people, I think that reaction speaks for itself. 3) Several people have pointed out that Diamond's central thesis, thumbnailed as geography is destiny, is inadequate for a lot of questions. Sure it is. But I'm sure Diamond would admit that no one theory or set of ideas could explain all of history. In some sense, I think he was suggesting at the end of his book that this work is a brave early attempt at trying to use more "hard" scientific parameters (such as zoology, botany, geology, etc.) in the study of broad patterns of human history. Also, Diamond is careful to couch his arguments in very broad, sweeping terms, which is what most of the focus of his argument is about. He discusses "Eurasians" as compared to "Americans" or "Australians"; many of the criticisms expressed by people here are speaking of events and arguments that are far more specific than that. Of course others have worked on this as well, but this book is at least something of a breakthrough because Diamond has managed to articulate very interesting ideas to a lay audience. One doesn't, of course, have to agree with Diamond on everything, but I do think that a lot of the negative feedback here either missed the point of the book or was criticizing it for what it was not intended to be.
| 
