Guns Germs And Steel Critique

Guns, Germs, and Steel was published by Jared Diamond in 1977. Diamond is a UCLA professor and a scientist and his book has received remarkable response all around the world, in fact the book has won Pulitizer Prizer and was New York’s bestseller. Despite, of being highly regarded, the book is known as one of the most controversial book of its time. A lot critics has accused this book but the critic which stood out the most was William H. McNeill. McNeill is a historian and I agree with his criticism regarding the book and its conclusion. The reason Jared Diamond wrote this book was to answer the question of his politician friend Yali that why did some societies like Eurasia was able to develop Guns, Germs, and

Steel that were able to dominate major parts of the world, and why New Guinea was not capable of doing this? This question is certainly not a small picture kind of question because it covers a broad realm. Diamond is his book has tried his best to cover a whole pattern of history starting from before Ice Age to the modern period. But does Diamond's all time famous and award winning book was really successful in explaining the broad question. Such a type of

He mentions that Diamond’s argument was insufficient because he kept on arguing that the reason for the development of societies was due to their geographical location and their ease of domestication. And therefore, his statements lacked the important discussion about the role the culture played in the pace of progress and the development of societies. So let's look at Diamond’s weak points more carefully, as he said that development occurred because of plants and domestication but what is the idea behind that all these animals and plants were just there sitting around and waiting for the humans to come and make use of it? This sounds so ridiculous but that’s what Diamond’s is