Actuellement indisponible.
Nous ne savons pas quand cet article sera de nouveau approvisionné ni s'il le sera.
Vous l'avez déjà ?
Repliez vers l'arrière Repliez vers l'avant
Ecoutez Lecture en cours... Interrompu   Vous écoutez un extrait de l'édition audio Audible
En savoir plus
Voir cette image

Guns, Germs and Steel (Anglais) Broché – 30 juin 2005

4 étoiles sur 5
5 étoiles
4 étoiles
3 étoiles
2 étoiles
1 étoile
4 étoiles sur 5 9 commentaires provenant des USA

Voir les formats et éditions Masquer les autres formats et éditions
Prix Amazon
Neuf à partir de Occasion à partir de
Broché, 30 juin 2005
"Veuillez réessayer"

Cahiers de vacances Cahiers de vacances

Nos clients ont également consulté ces articles en stock
click to open popover

Offres spéciales et liens associés

Aucun appareil Kindle n'est requis. Téléchargez l'une des applis Kindle gratuites et commencez à lire les livres Kindle sur votre smartphone, tablette ou ordinateur.

  • Apple
  • Android
  • Windows Phone
  • Android

Pour obtenir l'appli gratuite, saisissez votre numéro de téléphone mobile.

Détails sur le produit

Commentaires en ligne

Il n'y a pas encore de commentaires clients sur
5 étoiles
4 étoiles
3 étoiles
2 étoiles
1 étoile

Commentaires client les plus utiles sur (beta) (Peut contenir des commentaires issus du programme Early Reviewer Rewards) 4.0 étoiles sur 5 9 commentaires
5 internautes sur 5 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
3.0 étoiles sur 5 Let's see, guns, germs, steel..left anything out?...Oh, how about culture? 24 octobre 2008
Par David McCune - Publié sur
Format: Broché
First I will agree with many reviewers in that Diamond makes a compelling argument for the influence of the relative starting points of different human societies. It was fascinating to read about the availability of potential food crops and domesticated animals and to see how this had repercussions in a society's development. I was a bit put off by the straw man Diamond continually was knocking down: the argument that some societies succeeded due to inherent genetic advantages (is anyone actually making that argument these days?), but I figured surely he was going to get around to addressing the role of culture. I was mistaken.

The two big blind spots in his argument are:
1) Why do so many of the great men of history arise from the Judeo-Christian cultural tradition?
2) Why China, with its relative advantages on the "starting line" of history has not been more influential in the past two centuries?

I was disappointed to find that Diamond ascribed no role whatsoever to the different cultures, their tolerance for risk, their governmental choices, in the ultimate success of those societies. Apparently the great men of history just happened to get born disproportionately in Europe and the U.S. Luck of the draw and all that. His answer for China was almost as unsatisfying. Apparently the homogeneity of China, its coastline, and its lack of war (relative to Europe) were the reasons for its initially surging ahead, then eventually lagging behind. Very little evidence was marshaled (unlike the earlier well-documented chapters). It was like Diamond realized China was going to require explanation and simply picked the ways it was most different from Europe. Now, the explanations he chose _may_ be the actual reasons for the differences, but I think one could equally argue that cultural and religious differences played a critical role.

Anyway, a very interesting read, especially the first half. And that's about right. I think Diamond has laid out a convincing case for the role of "nature" in societal development. Unfortunately, he seems to have decided that the other half, "nurture", is so trivial as to require no discussion.
5.0 étoiles sur 5 Excellent attempt at broad picture of human history 17 décembre 2008
Par Maneesh Mahlawat - Publié sur
Format: Broché
The final frontier?
Charles Darwin, an unsuspecting geologist's on HMS Beagle, recorded the rich variety of geological features, fossils and living organisms encountered on five-year journey to the new lands. A gift of critical insight, keen observation power, an ability to explain the observations by hypothesis, and an ability to bolster hypotheses by evidence leading to a theory helped him gain insight into the process which led to development of twelve different species of finches from a common ancestor. He theorized that the separate species had evolved because the birds were separated by space and time (isolation). In addition, the islands on which the finches existed had different materials they could feed on (environment). Reconciling the fossil evidence and his other observations he came up with theory of natural selection to explain the vast diversity of plant and animal life in biosphere. This theory has helped us understand the process by which genetically complex plant and animals and other phyla of organisms have evolved from single-celled microorganisms. The central thesis of the theory is that environment plays a vital role in origin of species. Application of this theory can help us understand the biological features in humans but not the cultural features. After all, aren't humans the only animals who modify their environment to suit their needs and not vice-versa? This specious argument coupled with racial theories propagated to justify colonialism led to claims that though humans are a species but they are divided into different races. The races differ on human characteristics such as cognitive skills, intelligence, strength, etc. Jared Diamond's chief contribution has been to explain the differences in human cultures based on the environmental factors coupled with quirks of history. Isn't it equivalent to opening of final frontier in understanding human societies? Some day, may be, our understanding of the process would be advanced enough to make simulation models explaining this difference.

Jared Diamond's role
Jared Diamond is a trained biologist who is interested in understanding human societies. His work has taken him to societies vastly different from his own, which in turn has helped him form this perspective. He has worked extensively in New Guinea, Polynesia, and other such places where humans lived in Stone Age a few generations ago. Other societies such as European and some Asian societies have crossed this milestone thousands of years ago and are industrialized societies today. A few other societies are on verge of getting industrialized, or are an agricultural society while some remote societies are still in Stone Age or Bronze Age. Jared Diamond's principal insight has been to understand the role of environment and history for this difference.

The beginning
Just as the development of different species of finch had provided a vital clue to Darwin, two different groups of humans with same ancestors but separated by time and space has provided vital insight to Jared Diamond. The two different human groups in question are Maoris and Morioris. The Polynesian people were the ancestors of Moriori and Maoris. This differentiation happened around 1000 AD when the Maoris had settled on all the habitable islands around New Zealand. The Maoris who remained on the mainland remained as farmers while those settling on the Chatam islands had to change their means of livelihood. The Chatam islands did not have climate that could support the tropical crops grown by the Morioris. Therefore, they had to revert to hunter-gatherer lifestyle. The mainland Maoris on the other hand remained agriculturists and their surplus produce led to development of labor. The Morioris however did not have enough surplus and all the able bodied people had to work to support themselves. The food could be captured by hand or with simple clubs and did not warrant any special technology. This lifestyle can only support a small number of people, which numbered 2000. Jared was able to reduce the differences in these islands to six environmental factors: island climate, geological type, marine resources, area, terrain fragmentation and isolation.

Explaining the New World
Developing on the theme further, he explains the reasons for colonialization of new world by the Europeans. He posits that environmental factors coupled with history were responsible for this as well. He analyzed such historical incidents as defeat of Incas even when their army was numerically superior. He traces the Incan defeat at the hands of Spanish conquerors to latter's use of steel swords, steel armor, guns and horses. On the other hand, the Incas had no horses and their weapons consisted of stone, bronze, or wooden clubs, maces, and handhold axes. With these weapons they could only injure Spanish people and not kill them.

The other factor, which helped Europeans, was the epidemics that spread among the Native Americans by coming in contact with the former. Europeans had developed immunity to these diseases as they had been in close contact with these diseases for a long time. For the Native Americans though, these diseases proved disastrous. It is estimated that diseases introduced with Europeans killed 95 percent of pre-Columbian Native Americans.

His approach
Jared's approach to explanations has been by using proximate and ultimate factors. The proximate factors are used in explaining the fates of societies at different developmental level coming in clash with each other. They explain the outcome of the event in itself. The proximate factors among others include guns, horses, germs, etc. The ultimate factors include factors such as orientation of continental axes (the civilization changes such as development of agriculture, use of other technology as gun powder was readily disseminated across Eurasia and not across the Americas), climate changes which isolated one group of humans from others, development of epidemics, etc.

Other chapters
His other chapters give details of origin and spread of agriculture, domestication of animals and resulting impact on the human societies. He details the reasons why some animals were domesticated whereas others could not. His documentation of some cultures adopting agriculture and then leaving it to revert to hunter-gatherer lifestyle and again adopt agriculture is really fascinating. His explanation of diseases as a gift of livestock is really fascinating. It was apparently a gift to Europeans as they were able to colonialize the lands without these diseases but not others.

His tries a cursory explanation of other cultures as well. He posits that Chinese were a heterogeneous people as well but they became monolithic by being conquered by Han people. The Koreans, Thais, Vietnamese are the distant Chinese cousins who fled Mainland China to escape the onslaught of monolithic culture. He gives a similar explanation for Africa.

I think that his thesis is essentially correct. However there needs to be serious research in applying the principles. As of now, it is a preliminary sketch on which the others have to build the idea. His explanation of why the Europeans were not the colonists but not the Indians is rather sketchy. One explanation could be that civilizations have their ebbs and tides. There could be time when Indians, Chinese, or people from parts of Africa were colonists but at the precise point when the European civilization was growing, the other civilizations were receding. The Roman Empire, the Islamic Empire, the Mongolian Empire, Mughal Empire had their zenith. They lost their empire to institutional factors or to due simply to lack of adaptation to changing times. The ruling classes had become too insulated from the general conditions to be able to provide guidance to changing times. One needs to research the individual events more to be able to generalize the phenomena.
18 internautes sur 19 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
5.0 étoiles sur 5 Well-done history of the human race for the past 13,000 years 11 octobre 2006
Par Peter D. Tillman - Publié sur
Format: Broché
How did the West grow rich and conquer the world? It wasn't

racial superiority, as the Victorians thought - indeed, Diamond

gives evidence that the average New Guinean may well be smarter

than the average European. His own one-sentence summary of the

book is: "History followed different courses for different peoples

because of differences among peoples' environments, not because of

biological differences among the peoples themselves"[clunk]. Or, it's the

environment, stupid. Or, the West got lucky.

I'm uncomfortable with history-as-polemics, but Diamond (usually)

keeps his facts and interpretations pretty well separated. And this is a

wonderful one-volume history of the human race. It is unusual, and

refreshing, to read a history written by a distinguished and literate

biological scientist. History isn't generally considered to be science -

"it's just one damn fact after another." But then, you could say the

same for large parts of astronomy, biology & geology.

13,000 years ago, the most recent Ice Age was ending, and people

everywhere still made their living as hunter-gatherers. Diamond starts

his story at the dawn of civilization. By Chapter 3, he's recounting

Pizarro's conquest of the Inca empire in 1532. In an afternoon, 168

Spanish soldiers routed an army of 80,000, killed 7,000, and captured

the Inca emperor. It's not surprising that the Spaniards would feel

superior. But the conquistadores' invisible allies had been at work

since 1492 - smallpox from Spain had killed the previous Inca emperor

and his heir, setting off a war of succession that fatally weakened the

empire. Diseases from Europe would ultimately kill up to 95% of the

native peoples of the Americas, often before they saw their first

European. The old American cultures were doomed from first contact,

even if the Old World visitors had been peaceful explorers and traders.

12,000 years of isolation had left native Americans with no resistance to

the lethal European microbes.

Where did these diseases come from, and why didn't the Indians

return the favor by infecting Eurasia? Many came originally from

domestic animals (for example, measles and smallpox from cattle), and

required large, dense populations to evolve. The Indians had few

domestic animals - one reason why they were poorer than Eurasians,

and those (fortuitously) had no diseases that "made the jump" from

animals to humans - good evidence for Diamond's "history as luck"


Diamond's history is wonderful, full of new science, strange facts, and

great anecdotes. The polemics get repetitious and a bit defensive at

times, but can be safely skimmed. This would have been a better book

had it been written as straight history, letting the facts speak for

themselves - but it's still well worth reading. Recommended.

Diamond, a professor of physiology at UCLA, is a frequent

contributor to Discover, Natural History, and Geo magazines.

Review copyright 1998, 2006 by Peter D. Tillman

Peter D. Tillman is a consulting geologist based in Arizona.
6 internautes sur 9 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
3.0 étoiles sur 5 Insightful, but too "politically correct" 26 mai 2008
Par Condado Beach - Publié sur
Format: Broché
I believe that if Professor Diamond had not suggested that the economic gap between first and third-world nations was due to environmental differences "exclusively" (as opposed to allowing for the possibility of group/genetic/biological/racial differences), this book would never have been awarded the Pulitzer by the politically-correct powers that be. In fact, he may have won that award for the very reason that he categorically dismisses any other possible explanation beyond a series of environmental factors that came into play in the past 13,000 years.

According to Diamond, the observed disparity between African and European nations, for instance, is due only (and could only be due) to factors external to the collective I.Q. of those who comprise these nations. But, curiously, it's not that the professor rejects the possibility that inhabitants of countries can differ collectively in I.Q. (in fact, in both the Prologue and Epilogue, the author tacks on his assertion that the indigenous people of Papua, New Guinea are "smarter" that many other human societies.) The real reason the author maintains his position is...well, he never really explains why he can't possibly fathom that biological differences could even be a minor factor in the mix. If the Papua people are smarter---and haven't been trailblazers for Guns, Germs and Steel---Diamond evidently reasons that biological differences can't be a factor. Maybe in the back of his mind, the good professor knew that if he suggested otherwise, the book wouldn't have sold a fraction of its current sales...(and why he believes that Papuans are so much smarter than Westerners is not clearly explained by Diamond, either.)

Despite Diamond's somewhat narrow, "incomplete" analysis, the basic thesis of the book---that geographic differences in the availability of food; the conduciveness of intracontinental travel; and the size of resident human populations together account for the differences in human outcomes---is in its own right quite fascinating. (Therefore, I do give the book 3 stars).

I simply object to how adamantly the author expounds on his theory. I would have hoped for a less authoritative approach, and greater openness to explanations other than the author's narrow subset of possibilities.
0 internautes sur 1 ont trouvé ce commentaire utile 
4.0 étoiles sur 5 Long, but great read! 10 mai 2008
Par S. P. Hayes - Publié sur
Format: Broché
Of course this book is a longer read than most but, pick it up if you are the least bit intrigued in the factors which make civilizations great. No matter what the critique, this book definitely makes you think of the world's history through a different lens then you are used to. Contemplate Wright's Non Zero and Huntington's Clash of Civilizations as follow-on texts.
Ces commentaires ont-ils été utiles ? Dites-le-nous