Was he right about everything ?

>cuck

this is you

this is you

learn to quote, reddit :^)

>Accusing me of being from plebbit

Why havn't the New Guineans produce great works of philosophy like Kant

or great works of science like Newton and Einstein

>they smarta than the white man tho

We both know you are,

The monk is you bitch.

How do you know they haven't? Oral Tradition and shit.

After all it was Socrates, father of Philosophy, who said he was against writing, seeing as it would kill philosophical dialogue for the most part, was unresponsive and would be taken out of context.

And he was right about everything. I don't agree with his conclusion, I love books, but he was definitely right.

Apparently Latin America has a very interesting oral culture of Philosophy which is mostly preserved by "indigenas" and will probably be lost if no one cares to write it down.

>>>/KC/

I'd just like to let you two intellectual giants know that my father could, in a bout of violence, supercede your two fathers.

no he said some stuff that he knew wasnt true but he gave you the hints to what that stuff is especially in the audio book, he compromised between what he truely felt and what the mainstream book of lies was at the time of publication

>shitskins
>superior to whites in anything
lmao, in delusion maybe

It is the same argument of Adam Smith inthe wealth of nations, that farmers are smarter than people in cities because farmers need to do a lot of different tasks and be good at all of them, while a city dweller only needs to specialize in a narrow field.

Diamond uses this argument for hunter-gatherers versus modern man, saying that hunter-gatherers need to make all their own tools, have an encyclopaedic memory of animals and fauna, how to find them, how to prepare them , how to use them or eat them, etc. A wildling might be smarter than modern man, just applied to other problems of life. As modern men, we don't know how shit works in our own world, from toilets to cell phones, but leave it to professionals and vast amount of knowledge built up over the ages that we don't even remember but have written down. It is probably easier for an idiot to survive in the modern world, than in the wild.

This must be why my farmer uncle still can't figure out how to turn on his PC from the 90s that's still running Windows '95.

It all makes sense now, it's because he's *literally* more intellectually advanced than everyone in Berkeley.

this liberal yid was wrong about everything

>he gave you the hints to what that stuff is especially in the audio book

Can you point out what those hints are ? I'm too lazy to check them.

Fucking this.

Any moron can make far reaching baseless claims which are backed up by absolutely nothing.

yes goy

Pic related

Read and you might learn something retard.

are you trying to prove his point? I don't even agree with him, but you're buttfuck retarded.

>still posting this image

it has been disproven countless times that domesticating zebras is a futile effort.

1) he tamed them, domestication is a process that takes centuries, maybe millenia

2) most zebras are not strong enough to carry a full grown man on their back. how are they supposed to carry a man and equipment, goods, weapons et cetera?

yes

Got who this man was confused with someone else.

No*

You mean

Yes*

No I meant no. I thought it was someone else but it wasn't so I changed it from yes to no

Quiet.

antaractica and shifting poles pre melts (ice shrunk at northern hem, grew in south

i like his narrative mixed with robinson and acemoglus why nations fail

This.
Another good book is "Making democracy work" which look at Italian history and democratic success of regions in Italy today by the guy who wrote "Bowling Alone", Putnam.

this is you

Why is it that the people who usually promote "racial superiority" aren't the finest specimens of that "race?"
In fact, often times, they might be rather unfine specimens in general.

>Jared Diamond given credibility
What happened to this board? It wasn't like this months ago, I thought it was clear that he's shit without, /pol/'s intervention.

I'm not even sure /leftypol/ is to blame for this liberal faggotry, I don't believe they'd go that far.

Are we being "raided"?

sorry

>42 posters
>15 uniques
It's leftypol samefagging

...

People who get into politics in general have something wrong with them

Nah leftypol isn't even dumb enough to support Jared Diamond. It's probably just one of those Niggeraboos who always posts links from those fringe sites about how "Africa is getting better"

Even Reddit, the most liberal place on the internet, knows Jared Diamond is shit.

livinganthropologically.com/anthropology/guns-germs-and-steel/

this pasta has been debunked countless times laddy

I mean, just read the first fucking point.
>Europe separated from central asia by the Alps
>no cultural exchange between China, Europe and Central Asia

Literally written by someone whose historical knowledge is 3 full documentaries from Hitler channel.

Argument boils down to that Diamond is simplifying too much and leaving too little to human agency.

That is making a strawman, of course something has to do with human agency and so on, but that doesn't make it less true that the ones living on the Eurasian continent benefited immensely from having a bigger variety of animals and plants to domesticate, a larger area to cultivate, and a west-east axis that made agriculture easier to spread, and that in a pre-industrial society, agricultural production is the alpha and omega of prosperity. Agriculture makes your group more numerous, more resistant to disease, sedentary enough to produce material culture, allow for specialization, etc. It's why the Bantus took over Sub-Saharan Africa and not the Khoi-San. It is why the Austronesians spread to Madagascar and Easter Island, and not the Papuans. Agriculture is a big determining factor, and the ones that were lucky to have it, usually won.
Of course there are other factors, but that doesn't make it less true that all the things Diamond mentioned had a big influence on how things played out.

No. Pretty much everyone from the fields his book covers (history, anthropology and political science) disagree with him. He is a typical case of an person who goes to research with the intention of proving his own musings right, and not actually finding the truth.

You too are misrepresenting his argument, especially towards western dominance.

Diamond's argument for western domination in eurasia itself is short and not part of his main argumentation. China was colossal and didn't know competition, compared to the fractured European continent with competing powers. Western Europe out-competed the Middle East and North Africa as those areas suffered from deforestation and desertification, which is more due to them not having as much rainfall as the Western Europe that is on the Atlantic coast. These arguments are presented more as hypothesises at the end of the book as they don't figure into the tale about agriculture in the same way.

well

Wow that is seriously just shit.

Europe isolated from Central Asia by the alps top kek

The desire to explain human history in every lens but differences in average intelligences is going to be laughed at and derided in another century or two of thought. Studies continue to show minor differences in even faulty metrics like IQ produce huge differences in average social outcomes. The idea that this cannot reasonably explain historical events is just pure ideology *sniff*.

Diamond is correct in many ways but his arguments painfully steer around an obvious gap in thought.

The fuck are you on about Reddit isn't uniformly libreral. there's a fuck ton of right wing, far right win and alt right wing subreddits there.

Not really.

He's probably the best example of that breed of bad scholarship where the researcher starts with an opinion/belief (in his case, the equality of man) and works backwards to come up with an argument to defend this "conclusion," rather than starting with a question and accepting whatever answer the evidence best supports.

Yup