In his thought-provoking perspective, “Guns, Germs, and Steel,” Jared Diamond, a Professor of Geography and Physiology at UCLA, aims to explain the factors that contributed to the impressive successes of Eurasian civilizations in terms of population and land. He addresses Yali’s query about the differences between advancements made by white individuals in New Guinea compared to limited progress achieved by black individuals. While Diamond does provide a satisfactory answer to Yali’s question, I believe it lacks depth considering the extensive scope of the topic.
In his book Guns, Germs, and Steel, Jared Diamond argues that disparities in the histories of different peoples can be attributed to differences in their environments rather than variations in biology. However, Diamond fails to consider the significant influence of culture and biology. Despite his esteemed position in ecology and evolutionary biology, Diamond is widely acknowledged as one of America’s foremost scholars.
Diamond was awarded the Pulitzer prize in 2001 for his renowned book Guns, Germs, and Steel. This bestselling work has been translated into 25 languages and highlights the significance of comprehending world history to make beneficial choices for humanity. Nevertheless, despite his accomplishments, Diamond himself contradicts this notion by providing a negative example.
Diamond’s book, Guns, Germs, and Steel, strategically presents information to support a pre-existing conclusion without providing footnotes or specific references to theorists and scientists. It is important to mention that the intended audience for this book are popular science enthusiasts and those interested in environmental studies, rather than academic scholars. However, despite this focus on a general audience, the organization and presentation of information in Guns, Germs, and Steel is remarkably impactful.
I am perplexed by the title of the book as it pertains to “guns” and “steel” since only a fraction of its content focuses on these subjects. The narrative commences with Yali’s inquiry and proceeds to explore a timeline encompassing human migration, the rise of agriculture, and the domestication of flora and fauna. Moreover, the book presents a captivating notion concerning how cultural interactions and population shifts along the east-west axis have fostered success, while advancements along the north-west axis have been comparatively less prosperous.
Diamond continues to discuss the progression of disease and social organization, reiterating much of what has already been stated in the previous fifty pages. It is unclear who Diamond is directly opposing in his arguments. His work seems to present a general response to individuals who hold rigid and unpopular beliefs, such as those advocating for “white power”. These individuals are unlikely to be swayed by any book, regardless of its writing style or factual basis.
Despite not being directly involved in academic environmental discourse, Guns, Germs, and Steel is noteworthy for its capacity to initiate discussions among individuals. This book has garnered extensive acclaim for stimulating fresh perspectives in numerous readers and has achieved remarkable sales, highlighting Jared Diamond’s skilled writing. Personally, I had modest initial expectations of Diamond; nevertheless, after perusing Guns, Germs, and Steel, I have acquired considerable understanding on subjects such as the progression of agriculture, the domestication of plants and animals, and the migration of non-European populations.
Chapter 4 of “Guns, Germs, and Steel” by Diamond delves into the extensive history of humanity spanning 10,000 years. The objective is to pinpoint a single factor that has influenced the present global situation. Although this task is undoubtedly daunting, Diamond underscores his main argument: the environment is solely responsible for the disparities among modern populations. To support this claim, Diamond includes a succinct chart on page 87.
The text illustrates how different factors such as ultimate causes (the east-west axis) and proximate causes (guns, steel, technology, writing, transportation, and diseases) contribute to certain outcomes. While this is a simplified way of understanding things, there are opposing theories and evidence that contradict Diamond’s argument. In Chapter 6 of Guns, Germs, and Steel, Diamond discusses the shift from hunter-gatherer to food producer strategy in Mesopotamia, which was prompted by the decline in available game.
In his book “Borderlands of Science,” Michael Shermer discusses how despite humans gaining control over their food supply, they still suffered from nutritional deprivation compared to present-day hunters and gatherers. This led to a decrease in men’s average height by six inches. However, societal and cultural influences motivated individuals to remain part of sedentary communities. From a survival standpoint, it would be unreasonable for people to choose food-producing societies over hunting and gathering unless there were cultural or social factors involved.
Diamond argues that the successful diffusion of food production across Eurasia can be attributed to similarities in climate, geography, disease conditions, and limited barriers for migrants. However, the vast expanse of Eurasia becomes apparent when examining a map. The migration of people was not always fruitful as it occurred not only towards the east or west but also towards the northeast or southeast.
In the field of environmental determinism, Diamond’s book “Guns, Germs, and Steel” has made significant advancements. While acknowledging the impact of physical environment on human culture, other environmental determinists like Thomas G. argue that Diamond does not adequately consider the differences in environments people migrate to. According to this historiography, the physical environment is seen as the sole factor shaping human behavior. This belief draws on the scientific theory of stimulus-response, where the environment acts as the stimulus and influences all aspects of human behavior. What sets Diamond’s contribution apart is its deviation from prevailing views among other environmental determinists.
Taylor, Ellsworth Huntington, and Ellen Churchill Semple (who borrowed heavily from Friedrich Ratzel, a German who coined the term Lebensraum, later key in the Nazi political agenda) generally suggest that the environment is the reason why Europeans or white people are more civilized and generally more intelligent. However, Diamond argues that the New Guineans of the same era would have been smarter than the Europeans. This argument is intriguing and uncontroversial, partly because it takes a “reverse racism” approach and partly because there is no definitive way to prove its validity.
Discussing the point of whether Diamond’s objectivity in determining the role of the environment in shaping humanity opens up a sensitive subject – racial superiority. While including unscientific and subjective observations may make his writing more enjoyable for readers, personally, it makes me more skeptical and cautious about the rest of Diamond’s writing. Diamond underestimates the significance of cultural and genetic differences in different groups of people, which has a bearing on their success compared to others.
The African people, like sickle-cell anemia, have developed immunity to diseases such as malaria. This unique circumstance has spread independently throughout Africa. Christian missionaries and representatives of other faiths have embraced the responsibility of disseminating their religious beliefs through education and assimilation.
Although environmental factors have not caused many deaths in spreading the kingdom’s message, it is possible that individuals’ diverse biological makeup contributes to their desires to share their faith. Despite my disagreement, I agree with Diamond’s assertion that the environment has significantly influenced power struggles between various groups.
If you want to fully understand the subject matter, I strongly suggest reading Guns, Germs, and Steel. However, it would be beneficial to supplement Diamond’s work with a variety of articles, readings, and opinions that offer alternative explanations. It is crucial to explore influential works on ecological determinism and related discussions. One source that Diamond has referenced multiple concepts from is Alfred W. Crosby’s Ecological Imperialism – this source deserves careful consideration.
The environment has played the most significant role in determining the success of one group compared to another. However, disregarding or refusing to acknowledge the influence of culture and biology is ignorant. If Diamond’s theory is accurate, why can’t it be applied to answer the fundamental question raised after reading Guns, Germs, and Steel? Wouldn’t different agricultural environments necessitate distinct inherited traits in people, thereby impacting their success in those environments?
