Rating: 
Summary: Book is too long but makes some good points -
Review: Actually, I enjoyed this book quite a bit up to a point, but at 400 pages its just a little too long for the central thesis to support. Basically, Diamond is saying that Eurasians got a head start due to domesticable animals, the best wild grains to cultivate and an east-west axis to promote widespread adoption of these things.All well and true, esp liked the charts of domesticable animals and best grains - interesting stuff. But, only in the last few pages does he discuss why it is that it was the West ( European/Christian ) civilization that ended up winning the race for global dominence. The Chinese were part of the Eurasian landmass, and the Arabs had a head start on everyone, so why do the Europeans conquer all? Mr Diamond seems at pains not to ascribe any of the success of Western culture to an interest in learning or a religious attitude different from the rest of the world. An open mind is needed here - and an editor to trim this down to the 150 pages such a thesis should properly fill.
Rating: 
Summary: New Thoughts on Humans and our World
Review: If you have the slightest interest in the grand themes of the evolution of thinking and culture, this book is one of the intellectual touchstones you should include in your reading. Diamond covers a wide range of technological, ecological, and biological topics that leave you stimulated and better informed on the factors that shaped societal evolution.
Rating:
Summary: Wonderful and Thought Provoking
Review: What can I say? This was a Pulitzer winner and I have to agree. He does an excellent job of presenting his thesis and exposing a different way of looking at the reason why the European cultures came to dominate our globe. As an aspiring novelist who was looking for a foundation to shape his own fictional settings I found this text provided a wealth of thoughts. Of course, some of my friends would say I'm always off in my own fictious world anyway!
Rating:
Summary: excelente amalgama de diferentes ciencias
Review: Esta tarea parece en principio demasiado grande para un solo autor, pues recopilar la vida en la tierra, abarcando toda los continentes con excepción de la antártica por un periodo de 13.000 años, parece enorme y en verdad el libro es monumental. No agobia ni cansa al lector con jergas antropológicas ni lenguaje rebuscado. No esta lleno de odiosos pies de paginas, que tanto atrasan al lector. Es rápido, y se mueve a buen ritmo explicativo, yéndose de un tema a otro sin ser repetitivo ni pedante. La historia parece documentar mas a Australia y Nueva Zelanda, pues el autor ha hecho mas investigación ahí, pero su enfoque de los demás continentes esta muy bien logrado, pues no esta tratando de contarnos toda la historia, sino solo lo referente a los primeros asentamientos humanos y el paso de las organizaciones humanas, de nómadas, a bandas, de bandas a reinos y de reinos a estados. Claro que la transición de cada uno de ellos no fue homogénea ni rápida, tardo mucho y varios factores ayudaron a que a veces se adelantara y a veces que se retrasara. Las fuerzas externas, como guerras, y amenazas de conquistas por parte de invasores, hacían que las grandes tribus se uniesen para protegerse de enemigos comunes. La geografía juega parte importante en el desarrollo de esta tesis, ya que los accidentes geográficos y los cambios climáticos, según el autor, ayudaron o retrasaron el desarrollo de los pueblos, unos como los de nueva Zelanda y Australia que permanecieron aislados y subdesarrollados, y otros, los pueblos europeos que al poder hacer un intercambio de producto, se beneficiaban de un intercambio de ideas y difusión de cultivos entre pueblos. Por supuesto que es una teoría y es perfectamente debatible como cualquier otra y en un futuro próximo esta tesis podría ser confirmada por mas información o rebatida con igual cantidad de información en su contra. Aunque pienso que el libro es fantástico y no debe de ser tomado bajo ningún concepto como un libro racista, sino instructivo. Muy buena lectura no solamente para los amantes de la antropología sino para quien quiera enterarse del porque de muchas cosas y tener datos certeros a mano... Luis Mendez
Rating:
Summary: Information-packed, but...
Review: NOT CONVINCING. Well-written, well-researched, well-put together. The explanations given for the premise of this book, i.e. 'it's not their fault they're like that and it's not our fault we're like this,' are self-defeating. Well-chosen historical incidents to bring topic into foreground. Good read, but keep focusing on the question and you won't find a convincing answer. Also recommended: Road to Serfdom by Hayek Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun by Roberts Johnson White House Tapes by Beschloss
Rating:
Summary: Worth the read, despite everything
Review: Many of the criticisms of Diamond's book among the 250+ reviews below correctly point out its many flaws: the short shrift given to cultural factors, the over-emphasis on the regions with which the author is most familiar (e.g. New Guinea, Polynesia), sweeping and often unsupported generalizations, repititions in the body of the text, etc. However, overriding thesis on the vital importance of biological and geographic/geological factors in shaping the broad course of human history is a valid one and he argues it quite plausibly. The only problem is that Diamond's arguments begin to falter as he gets closer to the modern era, which is his own fault for not conducting the necessary research and thinking his basic ideas over more thoroughly. However, perhaps the most important aspect of "Guns, Germs and Steel" lies in the public response to it (as seen both on this public reviews page and in the U.S. as a whole, where it was a bestseller and Pulitzer Prize winner), as people were essentially surprised at having human history presented in such a manner. This despite the fact that many of Diamond's basic points are hardly original, and specific aspects of his argument have been brought up and explained in much greater detail by other historians, anthropologists, etc., as even the most superficial glance at Diamond's own bibliography shows. This is indicative: in the U.S. at least, the basic impact of biogeographical factors on human history is hardly ever discussed in any depth (if at all) in high school and university "Western Civ" courses-either in lectures or in the textbooks. In this sense, Diamond's book is an excellent supplement to any study of world history, although it should be read critically.
Rating:
Summary: A good, but incomplete effort
Review: Having read the book and approximately 100 of the reviews, I have decided to give this book 3 stars. That conclusion is based on the fact that much of material is either new to me or is something that I had never sat down and thought about. I found the book interesting, provocative, and, ultimately, unsatisfying. In covering thousands of years of history over many continents, Diamond, by necessity, deals in sweeping statements and (over) generalizations. Because specific statement and arguments are not referenced (there is only a section on "Further Readings" in the back of the book), the reader not intimately familiar with the book's wide-ranging material must rely on Diamond's abilities to analyze and reason in a unbiased manner. It is immediately apparent on picking up the book that Diamond's reason for writing it is to refute any notions that Western civilization is superior because of the people involved. Instead, he argues that Western civilization is a fluke of nature, and that it is only luck that prevented Europe from being colonized by Third World peoples. I have no problem with Politically Correct thinking as long as it is factually correct. However, Diamond, very early in this book, gave me reason to doubt his abilities to analyze and reason carefully. The best example of the above is his discussion (on page 20 and 21) as to why he thinks that native New Guineans are more intelligent than Europeans. He offers no evidence except the observation that New Guineans have an obvious advantage over him when he is trying to find his way in the jungles. This is really not so surprising: one would expect people who have lived in an environment all of their lives to have mastered it. A truer test of intelligence would be how quickly someone can master a new environment. His argument is really no different than saying that Bostonians are more intelligent than Midwesterners because the Midwesterner finds the street layout of Boston to be confusing and ends up getting lost (an experience I recently had). The arguments proposed by Diamond as to why New Guineans are more intelligent than Europeans are even weaker. One argument is that constant tribal warfare selects more intelligent people. A moment's thought raises major questions about that line of reasoning: Why does warfare with primitive weapons select for intelligence instead of for size, brute strength, aggressiveness, or quickness? If there were constant innovation in weapons and fighting tactics, that would be a method by which intelligence would be selected by constant warfare by giving a survival advantage to intelligent warriors, but no evidence was presented to support that notion. The second reason is even weaker: New Guineans are more intelligent because they don't watch TV! The research on childhood intellectual development and TV viewing that I have seen is inconclusive, and Diamond does not quote any research to support his claim. Perhaps his claim is true, but, if so, it clearly leads to a conclusion that Diamond does not anticipate and that he would clearly object to. If TV watching leads to lower intelligence and functions as do most environment factors, then more TV watching would lead to lower intelligence than would low or medium TV watching. In other words, it would not be an all-or-none phenomenon. However, Diamond does not address the fact that, in several surveys, African-Americans have been found to watch considerably more TV per day than do other ethnic groups. By Diamond's reasoning, African-Americans are therefore less intelligent than are members of other ethnic groups, including New Guineans. He would be clearly appalled by this conclusion, yet it follows naturally from his previously stated line of reasoning. My question then is whether the reader can trust Diamond to analyze and reason carefully and take his line of inquiry wherever it leads, however unpopular and politically incorrect that may be. Based on the above example, I think the answer is no, that he will not venture into areas and explore other than a strictly environmentally deterministic approach. That is why I find this book interesting, but incomplete and, ultimately, unsatisfying. He simply leaves too many questions unaddressed. Many general reviewers are greatly enamored with this book, but I would have liked to have read more reviews by professional historians, cultural anthropologists, and archaeologists.
Rating:
Summary: A must to understand the actual state of humanity.
Review: A book to enjoy, learn, and love. A fascinating book, I read it in one sit, if you start it you can't live it until you finish it. An excellent and well documented thesis, with a huge of well founded examples and data. About the style of writing, it's hard to distinguish if it's a fascinating novel or a scientific tome, Jared makes feel rigorous history as a tale. Recomended to everyone, newcomers or scholars.
Rating:
Summary: A must read for the layman
Review: I have read all the previous 250+ reviews and I don't have anything terribly new to add. I can just say that personally as an African (one of the Bantu that Diamond refers to) I found this book FASCINATING as I had never been exposed to such a cohesive and comprehensive theory of the impact of geographical factors on human societies. Of course I knew that theories existed but not with this level of DETAIL and sustained EVIDENCE. In particular I was impressed with his elucidation of the importance of technology diffusion (Europe got most of its early technology from Middle East and China) and geographical isolation (Australia suffered from its relative isolation). The impact of the SHAPE of the continent was also an idea i had never considered. It was also interesting to learn of the relative levels of advancement of American, African , Aborignal and Eurasian civilizations. It emerges that on a global basis Africa was roughly parallel to America and that the Aborignal were the sole people to remain in the hunter gatherer stage. This makes sense considering the relative size, shape and isolation of the respective continents. This also corrected my previous erroneous belief that Africa was on the trailing edge of global civilization. Lets see ... Copper working in 2000 B.C., Iron in 1,000 B.C, Steel by early A.D, not as bad as I had thought , better than Australia certainly. The surprising early strength and unity of China was also another revelation to me, I had always assumed my Chinese friends were boasting when they talked about how old and advanced their civilization was. In this light current Asian success can be seen in its historical context: The foundation was laid down several millenia ago, the Western lead was really just temporary historically(last 500 years). Lastly, I expect that with modern technology the role of geography will be much smaller and technological diffusion will occur MUCH more rapidly than in the past. So in the next 1000 years we can expect to see technological differences between different regions to disappear as the barriers to technology transfer decrease. For once in my life I was glad for the scourge of Malaria! It seems Malaria was one of the chief reasons Africa was not settled by Europeans and Bantu ethnic groups were able to survive. I might not be here to write this if not for Malaria!! In conclusion I would like to agree with all of peggywb comments of August 18, 2000. I feel much more enlightened after reading this book.
Rating:
Summary: The Best
Review: One of my favorite books,learned more in this book then what i learned in all my years in high school.
| 
