I finally read this book, and it's great! Why isn't it required reading in all schools? I always knew racism was factually incorrect but I never knew why.

File: 61 KB, 454x700, guns-germs-and-steel.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:10:18 2013 No.4316151 [Reply] [Original]

I finally read this book, and it's great!

Why isn't it required reading in all schools?

I always knew racism was factually incorrect but I never knew why.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:17:19 2013 No.4316166 >>4316151 >I always knew racism was factually incorrect but I never knew why. Why?

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:17:19 2013 No.4316167

>>4316151
Does that book actually tell you 'why racism is factually incorrect'? I'd think you'd need a genetics book for that.

Mind you, I do remember reading some of it and thinking it was pointless strawmanning, since surely nobody since about the 1950s could seriously believe that the events of history were determined by different racial capabilities. Then I discovered 4chan.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:22:19 2013 No.4316182 >I always knew racism was factually incorrect but I never knew why. Genuinely good line

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:34:19 2013 No.4316205 >>4316166 Because different races lived in--but didn't evolve/adapt to--different environments.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:35:19 2013 No.4316211 File: 825 KB, 1224x1584, Race is real.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316167 >>4316205 I disagree.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:35:19 2013 No.4316214 >>4316205 What do you mean by 'races'?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:36:19 2013 No.4316219 File: 838 KB, 1224x1584, race and crime.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316211

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:37:19 2013 No.4316226 File: 271 KB, 940x690, race is not a social construct.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316205

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:39:19 2013 No.4316231 >>4316214 Sorry, I meant so-called "races". Obviously there was no time for human populations to evolve different traits, so we are all the same race. (Skin colour notwithstanding).

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:39:19 2013 No.4316232

>>4316211
Yeah, sorry, but there's nothing here providing evidence that
>the events of history were determined by different racial capabilities
Even assuming we had huge amounts of evidence of meaningful differences between human populations, that would be an absurdly reductive way to look at history.

(though to be fair so is environmental determinism, which IIRC Guns, Germs, and Steel heads in the direction of. But I'd say it's a mildly less absurd one)

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:42:18 2013 No.4316236 >>4316231 You are /pol/ in disguise and I claim my 10 internets. The way you keep hitting and saying the opposite of /pol/'s talking points instead of not even considering them is a dead giveaway.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:46:18 2013 No.4316246 >tfw /pol/ hits on an absolutely genius way of posting here: pretending to be the opposite of /pol/

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:52:54 2013 No.4316265

>>4316151
Because it's terribly biased and emotionally tilted.
The study of history is not a pulpit from which to proclaim your moral damnation of people who have died centuries ago (not that you can even judge them to begin with, having lived and learned in a world entirely different than that which they experienced), but a tool to discover the what's, why's, when's, where's, and how's of human history. Fuck off with your "oh, but we're such monsters!' dialogue. You can not judge the great men and women of history without being a great man or woman of history.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 18:53:54 2013 No.4316269 >>4316211 >cites professors without ever citing any of their peer-reviewed works >present the reifying of intelligence as a singular, universally accepted thing stopped reading right there >>>/stormfront/

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:01:55 2013 No.4316283 >>4316246 /pol/ has some strange misconceptions about /lit/ honestly I think it's because they instantly associate literature and philosophy with the worst kinds of left wing social justice tumblr shit

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:04:54 2013 No.4316289 >>4316283 /lit/ is an overly moderated shithole though. I've seen whole threads get deleted for having conservative opinions. And I LIKE /lit/ despite this shittiness, so whatever /pol/ thinks of it, they'd probably be justified in thinking it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:04:54 2013 No.4316291 And now a good thread about a good book will turn into a /pol/ tier shitfest. Just create another one, OP. I really liked this book and want to read other stuff from Diamond. What do you people recommend and why?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:06:54 2013 No.4316297 >>4316289 yeah the moderation is a bit trigger happy. But the board as a whole, while mostly left-leaning, is nowhere near as deluded as the average american liberal.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:06:54 2013 No.4316299 >>4316297 Really? Why was their such condemnation of Zimmerman in that thread about the book surrounding the case?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:07:54 2013 No.4316300 >>4316291 It's almost as if people have opinions you don't like!

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:08:54 2013 No.4316301 >>4316265 I didn't notice any emotion in the book outside the introduction. It seemed to me to state simply that Europeans dominated shit because our environment was some kind of golden mean.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:11:54 2013 No.4316306 File: 61 KB, 575x306, zebras.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >Diamond says Africa lacking any domesticable animals was one of the reason Sub-saharans failed so badly >mfw he said Zebras can't be domesticated Europeans are just superior.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:12:54 2013 No.4316307 >>4316299 Because he's a belligerent asshole who had exactly as much responsibility as Trayvon for the confrontation, the only difference being he was the guy with the gun. Nigga moments ain't about race, it's about class.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:13:54 2013 No.4316308 >>4316301 it's a somewhat mechanic view of history that takes credit away from european civilization, dismissing its success as "well you guys just got lucky with dem sheep"

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:14:54 2013 No.4316309

>>4316307
>Nigga moments ain't about race, it's about class.

Which is why poor whites commit less crime than poor blacks, and middle class blacks commit more crime than middle class whites, right?

And
>Because he's a belligerent asshole
Because he decided to try and protect his neighbors?
>the only difference being he was the guy with the gun
The difference is Trayvon attacked him. Zimmerman didn't lay a hand on him

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:14:54 2013 No.4316310

>>4316307
He followed some black kid for like a block. Otherwise he's like a goddamn model citizen.

Fuck Trayvon. I'm not racist but that little shit was a thug retard who attacked someone physically, in a stand your ground state, with no good reason. There is nothing interesting about his death via self-defence other than the criminal acts of that goddamn lawyer who got the case heard in the first place and the incompetence of the prosecution.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:15:55 2013 No.4316313 >>4316300 These people have a place to discuss their dumb beliefs: /pol/ There they can blame their personal failures on people with a different skin color.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:16:55 2013 No.4316315 >>4316308 But then the question becomes, why did Europeans have the superior culture in the first place? Personally, I think the answer is a mix of Greeks, Christianity, and no Genghis Khan.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:17:54 2013 No.4316316 >>4316313 We get it, you're a sensitive soul who can't bear to hear things he doesn't like. Would you like a bedtime story too?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:18:54 2013 No.4316321 >>4316308 I'm not qualified to discuss this matter, but europeans got lucky with plenty of factors. It makes sense that they became so dominant.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:19:54 2013 No.4316323 >>4316313 So you want to discuss a book on why certain races did better than others... while excluding an entire side of the debate? You certainly are a special kind of retard.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:20:54 2013 No.4316324 >>4316310 "goddamn model citizen." Which is why he' been arrested twice for anger-related crimes.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:20:54 2013 No.4316326

>>4316316
What's the purpose of having different boards, can you tell me?
This board is about literature, not about losers who can't take the blame for their failures. Why do you want to come here instead of discussing at /pol/, where people actually want to engage in this shit? It makes no sense.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:24:54 2013 No.4316331

>>4316326
>This board is about literature
And literature doesn't cross over into other subjects? interesting.

>not about losers who can't take the blame for their failures.
Funny you say that. I believe those who blame racism and discrimination for the failures of blacks are far bigger losers than people who believe in racial differences.

>Why do you want to come here instead of discussing at /pol/, where people actually want to engage in this shit?
I come here to discuss literature, I see a thread about a book discussing races and why they apparently did better than one another.

What did you think was going to happen? Everyone was going to hold hands and agree on everything that was said?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:24:54 2013 No.4316333 >>4316323 Who told you the book is about races? Did you even read it?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:25:42 2013 No.4316337 >>4316324 How many times was he convicted again?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:26:42 2013 No.4316340 >>4316333 It discusses various cultures that are composed of races, does it not?

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:28:42 2013 No.4316348

>>4316315
There is a lot of work on this. Why does anything happen as it does in history? Was Zheng He really a potential prototype for a Chinese mercantile era? Did Europeans just get a bunch of lucky breaks, possibly in a row? Was it all in being the first to discover good sailing technology or something? When do we say that one area came out "ahead" of the rest? The Early Modern Period? How do we delineate that area? What does it mean to be ahead? Can we talk about complex abstracts like "political sovereignty" or "the nation state" being major boosts to tendencies that led to prosperity, ingenuity, and world dominance?

There are a billion historiographical arguments about this shit.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:29:42 2013 No.4316349 >>4316340 It discusses civilizations. And the cultural exchanges play a big part on why Europe succeeded. If you saw race as a factor in anything, you didn't understand a thing. That's confirmation bias, bro.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:31:41 2013 No.4316353 >>4316337 How many times was OJ convicted?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:31:41 2013 No.4316357 >>4316353 Twice.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:33:41 2013 No.4316366

>>4316315

yes, I agree. Obviously natural and geographical factors played their role but the presence of the Church as a unifying political factor against external threats while still allowing for individual states played a big role. Huge orderly empires grow stagnant, some healthy chaos is good for cultural development.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:41:41 2013 No.4316385 >>4316340 No, /pol/, it doesn't. You should probably start reading stuff outside of your personal tunnel vision.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:41:41 2013 No.4316388 >>4316366 The way I see it, Europe (and the middle east, to an extent) worked as a team, inventing things and moving forward. China was a great civilization, but they worked mostly alone.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:43:42 2013 No.4316390 >>4316385 Ditto to you.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:45:57 2013 No.4316395

>>4316283
It's not even that. This is a thread that /pol/ started by pretending to have read a book, and then fell at the first hurdle with the utter idiocy of >>4316205

>inb4 but that's /pol/'s parody of the leftwing!
It's not idiotic for that reason. It's idiotic because in its attempt at parody it still clings to the very aspects of /pol/ it should be disavowing.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:47:57 2013 No.4316398 >>4316390 >no u

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:49:58 2013 No.4316401 >>4316395 I like how even left wing posts are blamed on /pol/ now. You people are as bad as Goebbels scapegoating the Jews.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:49:58 2013 No.4316403 >>4316398 he was pointing out how vapid it is to say "u read more i read lots" because he can just say the same thing back on an equal basis (i.e. none)

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:52:57 2013 No.4316411 >>4316403 Yeah, but this thread is /pol/ trying to talk about a book without having read it. The onus is obviously on /pol/ to read this book, not on anyone else to read other books.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:54:57 2013 No.4316417 >>4316401 Yes, truly this comparison is not a little excessive. Seriously though /pol/, why are you so stupid? I thought you were... y'know, white?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 19:55:57 2013 No.4316422 >>4316411 >>4316417 It's almost like racists are stupid.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:08:08 2013 No.4316459 >>4316299 >zimmerman >>>/mu/

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:10:08 2013 No.4316461 File: 68 KB, 939x397, stirner80.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >not judging individuals as unique instead of representatives of a certain spook

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:12:58 2013 No.4316467 >>4316422 >>4316411 >>4316417 >/pol/ Why are you so obsessed with /pol/? take off the tinfoil.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:14:57 2013 No.4316471 >>4316467 If you are racist and didn't come from /pol/, you don't know the fun you're missing.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:15:57 2013 No.4316474 >someone posts something racist FUCKING /pol/! >someone posts something anti-racist FUCKING /pol/! >someone posts anything FUCKING /pol/! I genuinely don't know who's trolling who anymore.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:17:57 2013 No.4316479 >>4316474 /pol/ is trolling /pol/ /pol/ymore tbh, this wouldn't be a thing if /pol/ didn't start to spill out in other boards. what's the point of a containment board if they can get out?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:20:57 2013 No.4316489 >>4316479 fun

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:21:57 2013 No.4316490 >>4316479 /pol/ doesn't "spill out". 4chan has always had a large group of racists, how new are you?

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:23:57 2013 No.4316500

/lit/ is the epicentre of people who needed to stop using edgy websites four years ago but who kept using them

i'm gonna seriously argue about why marxist transgenderism is important to me, but i want to retain the aloof internet persona i've inhabited for so long, so i'll do it in lowercase and say things like "p dumb" and "tbh you're being pretty privileged" and "/pol/ read your gramsci hth le epic ;)"

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:23:57 2013 No.4316501 >>4316490 >always How new are you, it was once ironic to be an anonymous edgemaster it still is, but we've attracted real idiots now that the Internet has become mainstream. You even see it spill over to Facebook.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:24:57 2013 No.4316508 >>4316501 >it was once ironic to be an anonymous edgemaster it still is >mfw reddit still trying to rewrite history and say that all the racism was "just jokes lel"

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:27:29 2013 No.4316521 >>4316508 Stop being a 4chan revisionist, you really are the biggest faggot online. It's pathetic. I should not want to partake in your "culture war" anymore, fag.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:29:29 2013 No.4316529

I took two classes under Prof. Diamond at UCLA (geo and anthro in case you care). The guy is a crack pot. The anthropological equivalent of JJ Abrams. He'll say whatever will sell without any evidence to back up his claims. If you wish to see for yourself, look at the bib for his books and find the texts he quotes. I guarantee 50% of them will be misquotes, mangled paraphrases, or outright errors of understanding.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:29:29 2013 No.4316530 >>4316521 The only revisionist here is you m8

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:31:30 2013 No.4316537 File: 62 KB, 479x720, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316530

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:34:29 2013 No.4316546 >>4316500 i think you're the one who should find another website if you're seriously bothered about the quality of posts/posters on 4chan didn't 'anonymous' help shut down the guy behind isanyoneup or whatever

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:45:29 2013 No.4316575 >>4316301 If European geography is to be blamed for the success of European culture, how do you explain Australia? Or America for that matter?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:48:35 2013 No.4316584 >>4316575 Read the book.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:49:29 2013 No.4316590

>>4316584

I tried but I couldn't get past the bullshit in the first few pages. He states that biology can't account for the difference in accomplishments of different cultures/races and then a few pages later he claims that children of Papua New Guinea are inherently smarter than European children "because their environment requires them to be so".

Well which is it, Mister Diamond?

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:50:29 2013 No.4316591 Europeans are explorers by nature and creative as hell. If they lived in Africa it would be even better than Europe is.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 20:52:29 2013 No.4316600

>>4316151
I remember hearing about another similar book on /lit/ that was supposedly a lot more accurate. Something slaughter something, maybe? Anyone remember or hear of it?

>>4316479
>>4316395
Please stop using /pol/ as the shitposting scapegoat. It's stupid to blame anyone one board for literally any shitposting or racebaiting that occurs on any board and it's getting a little tiresome. It's just laziness and an unwillingness to admit the existence of trolling on our own board. I don't think there's any more reason to believe that all shitposting is the result of /pol/ than it was /v/ or /sp/ or any other board that caught shit for it before.

pls someone have heard of the book I'm talking about, I'm very curious about it now.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:01:29 2013 No.4316627 >>4316591 No it wouldn't. Only reason Europeans got so far is because they had the treasures of the New World. If the Chinese had discovered America first we would all be speaking Chinese right now.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:04:29 2013 No.4316643 >>4316627 The chinese are too insular to ever discover anything beyond their own back yard.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:07:29 2013 No.4316650 >>4316643 Exactly. That's also why the Romans or Greeks never discovered America either.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:24:29 2013 No.4316678

>>4316315
The mistake you made to begin with was when you said that Europeans have a superior culture, where I'm sure you wanted to say it had a civilization technologically superior, ideally, morally and ethically more complicated or self-centered and economically more demanding than others around the world.
I remember when once on /int/ there was the same question regarding European superiority. I made my very ignorant and student-minded argument that Europe became so dominant because of its ideals based on reason, progress, ideal climate and economic needs and a butt-load of other circumstances that are basis of serendipity in history. Sheer luck combined with what was considered to be important for fulfillment of human nature and needs (reason, utility, survival, prosperity, etc) are what led to more discoveries, colonization, etc etc...
But then some history and archeology professor came in and completely refuted my arguments saying that life in middle ages was good and people were smart and prosperous, so the Renaissance had no impact on the thought of western civilization, because people were already smart enough in the middle-ages or something like that. Then he recommended a book that had to do with some kind of a strategy of the Byzantines and probably wanked to his vast knowledge of history of high-middle ages and the fact that he curb-stumped me.
So remember, it wasn't because of the Renaissance or anything like that, it was because farmers in middle-ages read Nietzsche and Socrates in their spare time.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:33:02 2013 No.4316690

>>4316678
Post-Roman Europeans just happened to develop a culture of Infinite Space. Nothing was too far fetched; nothing was unachievable. This is contrast to other cultures around the world which were strict and rigid. We can see this difference in European architecture, the enormous and very grand cathedrals for instance. Sure, other cultures built pyramids, but they don't compare technically or aesthetically. But that's beside the point.

Europeans were able to look across the oceans and think, "I wonder what's out there," in contrast to the Roman way of thinking, "There's nothing useful out there." There isn't even a Roman numeral for 0, because the concept was unfathomable to them. Infinite possibilities is a thing unique to post-Roman European culture, and that is why Europeans dominated the globe for the past 500 years.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:38:02 2013 No.4316702 >>4316575 because Australia and America are extensions of European civilization that emerged in an environment beneficial to civilization.

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:38:02 2013 No.4316704 OP, there was no way this thread was going to turn out good. Not sure if you're new to 4chan, trolling, or just stupid

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:42:02 2013 No.4316709 >>4316702 But I thought geography was more important than culture or race?

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:43:02 2013 No.4316714

Good Reading on the subject:
David Landes: Wealth and Poverty of Nations
Findlay and O'Rourke: Power and Plenty
Hobson: The Eastern Origins of Western Civilization
Pomeranz: The Great Divergence
Azar Gat: War in human civilization
>>4316690
There is a debate over the European "mechanical" mindset and whether it existed.

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 21:49:02 2013 No.4316720

>>4316709
It's a mixture of geography and culture. Initially geography was more important than culture however at a certain level of development in a civilization culture becomes more important.Race is pretty much irrelevant (although it could be argued belonging to a race had certain benefits i.e. blacks working in the Caribbean, belonging to the hegemonic race).

>>	Anonymous Thu Nov 28 22:02:34 2013 No.4316738 >>4316151 Because /pol/ is everywhere

Anonymous Thu Nov 28 23:56:39 2013 No.4317054

>>4316627
>Only reason Europeans got so far is because they had the treasures of the New World.

What treasure? Other than the White Race Europe isn't that special, Africa is way richer in resources.

Go read about the civilizations in Africa from 600AD to 1600AD...they were rich as fuck and trading and exploring regularly, farming, and cultivating land, etc.

Africa was booming in that period. But they never had the intellect to maintain it, to do science, philosophy, to enrich themselves culturally. They were lazy hedonists muh dickin on the beach basically.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 00:00:40 2013 No.4317062 >>4317054 This is why the idea of Wakanda always intrigued me, even if it's dumb comic book shit

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 00:19:57 2013 No.4317098

>>4317062

Wakanda is a terrible concept

>super science niggers come up with shit like the cure for cancer and laser guns
>they don't share it with white people
>they don't even share it with other blacks lacking superior wakandan genes

they're probably the most racist country on the planet but they come off as the good guys because they're black

any nation written exactly like Wakanda but inhabited by white people would be an evil imperialist reich out to conquer the world and subjugate all the mongrels

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 00:23:57 2013 No.4317106 >>4317098 I meant the idea of an advanced African nation since by all rights they should have been as advanced or even more advanced that Euros because of all the rich resources.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 00:29:57 2013 No.4317116 >>4316226 0.17 what? /pol/ometers?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 01:46:16 2013 No.4317212 /lit/ is literally the RevLeft of 4chan, with /pol/ being Stormfront. It's hilarious. They both use each other as scapegoats to constantly shitpost.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 03:00:21 2013 No.4317340 >>4317116 my sides

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 03:15:21 2013 No.4317359

>>4316307
>Because he's a belligerent asshole who had exactly as much responsibility as Trayvon for the confrontation
I like how the left accuses Zimmerman of being trigger happy when they claim Trayvon was justified in in assaulting Zimmerman because he had the audacity to get out of his car.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 03:19:21 2013 No.4317369 >Why isn't it required reading in all schools? Why isn't a book filled with speculations and written by somebody not considered an authority in that field taught in schools, you say? I dunno, lol.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 03:27:08 2013 No.4317379 >>4317359 It's because the Left is afraid of Black people. That's why we keep them pacified with welfare. Can't believe /pol/ hasn't caught that yet.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 03:49:08 2013 No.4317411

>>4316474
>someone posts something anti-racist: FUCKING /pol/!
>someone posts anything: FUCKING /pol/!

But this never happens. On /lit/ (and other boards, as far as I've seen) /pol/ is essentially short for 'racist'- I think because the only time we see people saying they're from /pol/, they're being racist.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 03:53:08 2013 No.4317419 >>4317212 But the difference is (AFAIK) /lit/ doesn't raid other boards with shitty memes about Jews. There aren't enough people on /lit/ to do that for one thing.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 04:04:55 2013 No.4317447

>>4316590
I think the answer to your question is that he doesn't deny the effects of evolution. All he says is that
>Sound evidence for the existence of human differences in intelligence that parallel human differences in technology is lacking
...it's not that there can be no differences that develop over time (though we don't know enough about the differences yet), it's that the differences which may or may not exist won't explain the way history turned out.

In fact, that answer is right there in what you say, no? He says New Guineans may be on average more intelligent, but that that didn't make them more technologically developed- so that's not where the answer lies.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 04:05:55 2013 No.4317450 >>4316151 /pol/ shill

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 13:22:40 2013 No.4318282

>>4317419
Congratulations on having the first post in this thread that mentions the jews. You would think that if this was a pol raid or something they would be doing some of the things that you blame pol of doing, like talk shit about jews. Except that hasn't been happening here.

In fact the only people who seem to be having shit talked about them in this thread are people who visit pol.

Interesting.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 13:25:40 2013 No.4318294 >>4316211 >>4316219 Get the fuck out, you bigoted Nazi shitlord.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 13:30:40 2013 No.4318305 File: 12 KB, 260x194, HesRightYouKnowMorganFreeman_zps8afb3143.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4317054 >>4317054

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 13:44:40 2013 No.4318348 File: 39 KB, 398x612, 1380253024996.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4318294 >bigoted Nazi shitlord. >implying Nazi is an insult in 2013 >implying history is what your grade 8 teacher taught you educate yourself

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 13:47:40 2013 No.4318351 >>4318294 >being this edgy

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 13:48:41 2013 No.4318353 >>4316211 >>4316219 >unamusementpark.com seems legit

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 13:53:40 2013 No.4318363 >>4318348 >implying it isn't Are you one of those people who think Hitler was a tolerant White Nationalist who just wanted to deport the "Zionists,",too.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:03:41 2013 No.4318380 So what evidence is there to suggest that evolution stop at the neck? Hm? I'm waiting If you believe in evolution then how can you not believe in genetic differences?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:07:29 2013 No.4318398 >>4316500 #REKT

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:10:29 2013 No.4318405 >>4318380 Who are you talking to? I'm pretty sure nobody's denying that humans are genetically different from each other- that would be silly. Diamond certainly doesn't deny that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:14:29 2013 No.4318420 >>4318405 he denies racial differences, except when it comes to jews.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:19:29 2013 No.4318431

>>4318420
Genetic differences =/= racial differences. You can accept that people vary genetically from each other without insisting on restricting that variation to 19th century pseudoscientific categories.

Also [citation needed] on him denying racial differences.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:37:45 2013 No.4318479

>>4316226
"Genetic distance" fucking lol

the only time any of these seething omegas have ever even pretended to be aware of genetic science is to back (horribly, I might add) a position which they've already accepted as truth

"genetic distance" is a unscientific concept that only shows a lack of conception of the discipline you're quoting

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:39:45 2013 No.4318482 File: 50 KB, 396x645, 1382604687770.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316500 This.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:46:45 2013 No.4318494 >>4318479 What's wrong with the concept? Is it just that the categories of 'Africans' and 'Eurasians' are hopelessly broad, or something else? (not /pol/, just curious)

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 14:52:45 2013 No.4318506

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/wd6jt/what_do_you_think_of_guns_germs_and_steel/

http://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/search?q=guns%2C+germs%2C+and+steel&restrict_sr=on

The book is not the most well regarded by historians (If the islamic ottomans had not restricted East-West trade, the age of exploration would have likely been much different, broad strokes are still interesting and right)

Racism is still stupid though

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 15:01:32 2013 No.4318527

>>4318494
Pure percentage of variation in a genome is erroneously faulty. The numbers don't matter, specific genes do. Its why we can share a massive proportion of our genome with plant life. A good portion of DNA is effectively junk. A whole species can be made by tweaking very small portions of DNA, while tons more can be manipulated with no noticeable changes in the organism.

Also, yes, race is more or less impossible to determine purely by genetic "distance" (though it can be determined by genes, just with a few tricks) There is also greater diversity and variation within sub-Saharan African communities than among all the rest of the world. Break up humanity in to races purely by "genetic distance" and you get a few dozen races in Africa and the rest of the world lumped into one.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 15:10:32 2013 No.4318536

>>4318527
Cool, thanks. I've actually suggested to /pol/ before that they should take their genetics stuff to /sci/ as I was curious about what the response would be. They claimed it would get deleted, which might be true, but also seemed pretty convenient.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 15:14:32 2013 No.4318547 >>4318431 Significant differences exist between groups of different ancestry enough to make the term race meaningful and important scientifically...sorry if nature isnot liberal enough

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 15:17:32 2013 No.4318552 >>4318536 People have done that since before /pol/ existed, to the point that it's sort of /sci/'s version of /tv/'s waifu/feet threads or I guess /lit/'s holocaust denial/jews threads. It's a "not this shit again, reported" topic.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 15:38:32 2013 No.4318596

>>4318494
>What's wrong with the concept?
Nothing, although its significance is not consistent. All mutations are obviously not created equals. Still, it is indeed significant. To put things in perspective for you, we share 95% of our genes with 'canis familiaris' and 98.4% of our genes with 'pans troglodytes'. Obviously, we differ radically from both species. From this illustration, you should be able to gather that differences of a mere fraction of a percent are significant. If we examine a couple of real world examples of this, we find similar results.

'Canis familiaris' and 'canis lupus' should possess no significant differences by the anti-racist standard, yet behaviour differs radically between the two species. These canines of course are of course more distinct from one another than any human group, but even individual lines of 'canis familiaris' differ radically from one another in both behaviour and capabilities.

'Pans troglodytes' and 'pans paniscus', which are differentiated by about .103%, genetically speaking. As with canines, the behavioural differences between these species are quite significant. Individual groups within our own species actually have genetic distances as high as .3%, so you should be able to gather from that information that the suggestion of biologically rooted differences is not absurd.

As for racists and anti-racists, both groups tend to be comprised of opportunists and idiots.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 15:39:32 2013 No.4318598 >>4318547 How many races are there, then?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 16:40:23 2013 No.4318781 You guys should read The 10,000 Year Explosion. Racial differences are important and significant, just like differences between dog breeds

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 16:57:39 2013 No.4318811 File: 30 KB, 360x360, potato.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4317054 >What treasure?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 17:16:26 2013 No.4318861 >>4316151 good. now you may want to read The black Jacobins is really great.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 17:27:26 2013 No.4318899 >>4318380 Humans haven't evolved to be different at all! A black baby and white baby are EQUALLY likely to have genes that give them dark skin. Likewise, they are equally likely to have equal levels of intelligence.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 17:29:26 2013 No.4318907 File: 19 KB, 235x212, 1337040068186.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4318781 Humans aren't dogs shitlord. All humans were created equal.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 17:35:26 2013 No.4318921 >>4318899 >>4318907 See >>4316236

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 17:40:26 2013 No.4318935

>>4317379

its pointed out all the time (assuming you actually spend time on /pol/)

'anti-racists' always self segregate in pure white gated communities.

zimmerman shouldent have done what he did because blacks are animals who cant control themserlves so he needs to take extra steps to not provoke them.

ironically, 'democrat' controlled areas have higher rates of income inequalities between NAMS and whites/asians.

the logical conclusion of 'white privilege' arguments is basically another way of saying white supremacy (we cant use the same standards because we are not equal).

*sniff* and so on and so on.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 17:59:12 2013 No.4318997 >>4318907 All humans were created equal. [citation needed]

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:16:28 2013 No.4319034 File: 152 KB, 1200x1640, 1385665296285.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316151 Such a silly thing to even consider that all races are equal. Political correctness is truelly the bane of contemporary society

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:17:28 2013 No.4319038 [DELETED]

File: 258 KB, 1551x805, jared diamond.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There are some things you can't trust the Jews on. Finance, for example. And critical views on race. They are too interested in promoting anti-rascism to be trusted on these things. More often than not, Jews manipulate data to enforce anti-racist propaganda, like Stephen Jay Gould did in The Mismeasure of Man, Ashley Montagu and Morris Ginsberg in The Race Question and Claude Lévi-Strauss and Franz Boas in all their work.

Their objective may be noble, but the means they use aren't.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:18:28 2013 No.4319039 >>4316627 Yeah but they didn't. Due to a large part because of the differences between the two, not equal, cultures

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:20:28 2013 No.4319048 >>4317379 >pacify people with welfare why do you think welfare is their to begin with...

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:21:28 2013 No.4319050 >>4318353 >botanist talking about pan-historic events and claiming he can constitute generalities derived from his assumptions seems legit

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:21:28 2013 No.4319052
File: 11 KB, 480x360, I DONT GET IT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>there are people who genuinely believe their race is inherently better than others
>there are people who commonly refer to "the blacks," "the jews," etc. and deep within their minds firmly believe this is a valid way to think about anyone (as in a grossly generalized group based on very little)

ok

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:22:28 2013 No.4319055 >>4319034 did you actually go and type all that out when it's available online for free

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:23:28 2013 No.4319056 >>4316246 I was thinking the same since it's how I imagined I would troll /lit/, if I were up to it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:25:44 2013 No.4319061 >>4319055 did you actually think I could be that bothered?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:27:44 2013 No.4319069 >>4318907 I don't think that comic maker understands the concept of evolution or the process of human evolution

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:29:45 2013 No.4319077 >>4319038 Wow! he totally destroyed a Pulitzer prize winning piece of academic discourse with 600 words on an openly racist internet forum!

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:29:45 2013 No.4319079 >>4316323 >an entire side of the debate Why are /pol/ types so single track minded on te genetic angle on why certain groups are successful than others? Even if it is a factor it's by far the least interesting one.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:29:45 2013 No.4319080

>>4319052
>there are people who genuinely believe their race is inherently better than others

very few think in these connotations as one race being better or worse.

It's more the popular opinion that all races are 'equal' that gets me buggin. There are obvious differences between the different races of mankind that you just can't toss away because these facts are inconvenient or scary to acknowledge.

It's hard by definition to argue what is 'better' and what is worse. One might find our Western norms and values to be worse than those of tribal means.

But the entire book seems to be written from a viewpoint that has the urge to debunk the dangerous opinion that all races aren't equal and that somehow Europeans are inherently better (being smarter) than Africans.

Naturally the Europeans have some credit to state this opinion. Would it matter if Europeans were actually inherently smarter? No, not by definition. But what it does mean is that its hard for multiple races to co-exist peacefully with one another when the differences between one another are too substantial to make a peaceful co-existion possible.
Multiculturalism is a fucking shitty thing and needs to go

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:30:45 2013 No.4319081 >>4319079 >Why are /pol/ types so single track minded on te genetic angle on why certain groups are successful than others? They like to simplify complex things.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:31:44 2013 No.4319084 >>4319080 >Multiculturalism is a fucking shitty thing and needs to go Unfortunately for you, most of us love it. Now stay in your barn and leave us civilized people in peace.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:34:44 2013 No.4319092

>>4319081
Simplifying things is one of the ways to make sense of the world around you. In essense, there are no hard truths, there is always a sense of subjectivity thrown in and thus there cannot ever be a truth that can be enbodied in society.

Thus one can only follow his own right or wrong. Which cannot be either right nor wrong from an objective viewpoint

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:36:45 2013 No.4319099

>>4319084
>most of us love it

I highly doubt that. The abundance of polarisation I witness amongst my peers and others is society is totally not gravitating towards a loveable thing. If anything, I hardly ever heard anything positive from people with their encounters with different cultures. Me personally have had nothing but negative encounters with immigrants.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:39:49 2013 No.4319109 [DELETED]

File: 70 KB, 750x392, redwhitewomen3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4319099
In America, 21% of white women have non-white babies. This number is only projected to increase too.

We will continue to unite as a species through love and there's nothing you or any other bitter racist can do about it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:40:49 2013 No.4319114 >>4316575 The foundation of European culture was already well formed by the time Aus. and america became colonies.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:41:44 2013 No.4319118 >>4319077 I could destroy Walter Duranty, another Pullitzer Prize winning academic, with a phrase from wikipedia.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:42:44 2013 No.4319119 >>4319084 >Unfortunately for you, most of us love it. Not really. Most of us simply move away from it. The native poor lack that option, thus they trend more towards the far right with each passing year.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:42:44 2013 No.4319121

>>4319099
>Me personally have had nothing but negative encounters with immigrants.

white immigrants perhaps?
The amerindian got killed when the white immigrants came, the blacks got enslaved, India, asia became colonized....

anyway the rest of the inmigrants are cool.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:44:44 2013 No.4319129 >>4319109 and America shall reap what it has sown.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:48:44 2013 No.4319144 >>4319109 multiculturalism and community are mutually exclusive concepts (see, putnam et all).

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:52:44 2013 No.4319149

>>4319109
>In America, 21% of white women have non-white babies.
Half of American 'Hispanics' are white. The other half are mostly a white/Amerindian mix. Blacks are more or less viewed as untouchables by both groups. Tell us more about how the Americans have created a multiracial paradise, please. I've been there, and they are some of the most racist people in the civilised world. In one hundred years, Hispanics will have almost entirely blended with the earlier population. The final result will be that Hispanic ancestry will be viewed much like Irish is today. The only real 'diversity' in America in European diversity.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:52:44 2013 No.4319150

>>4319121
I never said I was for the intervention of Europe into other colonies and civilizations.

I'd rather have that each sticks to its own and holds a healthy and proud interest in their own respective cultures and nations.

I despise the European actions against the Indians and the African slaves. But it was a part of history, something that cant be judged with our contemporary morals.

The one thing I observe is a prolonging calamity when this cultural marxism is left unchecked. This political correctness is enslaving us in our very homes. One but needs to open its eyes and see the very dangers we are facing, and that are increasingly trying to grab us by the throat.

I can't force you to 'see' these things as they transpire even more increasingly within society. All I can say is that one day shit will hit the fan and your lovey duffey morals wont be upheld when man falls into a state of nature.

I agree, I sound paranoia as fuck. But I truelly believe there is something wrong with modern western culture

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 18:56:45 2013 No.4319166 >>4319149 >Blacks are more or less viewed as untouchables by both groups Most white American women want to at least try a black man. As you don't live here, you can't say differently, sorry.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:00:44 2013 No.4319172

>>4319079

so this 'interest' of yours is now a criteria for determining the acceptability and applicability of certain truths?

thats basically what youre saying after all, 'even if its true it doesnt matter so forget about it you dumb racist'.

the only problem with this line of reasoning is that it DOES matter, a great deal. the whole argument is about this mythical 'systemic racism' that we cant point out exactly, but we definitely know is there, because *people are still unequal*. and how do we know this? because we've a-priori defined everyone as blank slates who are universally fungible, and so any variation must obviously be the result some kind of *social construct* (we've also defined 'equality' as the ultimate good, so dont get confused when we then define any and all attempts to pronounce values, conventions, or ideals [besides our own of course, but dont think to hard about it] as categorically evil).

surely you can see how a little thing like *evolution* (or even better, socio-genetic feedback loops), might be relevant to all this?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:01:44 2013 No.4319175 File: 21 KB, 493x524, okcupid_reply-by-race-male.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4319166 Ain't nobody wants to fuck a black man. No offense to niggers, I think they're cool, but let's not misrepresent basic facts here.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:03:44 2013 No.4319178

>>4319166
>Most white American women want to at least try a black man.
Why would they? Most American blacks are poor and uneducated. Women are very conscious of class. Additionally, why is black/white intermarriage so uncommon if this is indeed the case?

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:06:44 2013 No.4319190

>>4316151

Inductive nonsense.

It's much like Nostradamus in the sense you can only really say 'oh yes - look how it can be applied here!' afterwards.

It doesn't carry the unbiased marks of a true historical perspective and tainted by having everything interpreted (and fitted) through his hypothesis.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:14:44 2013 No.4319209 >>4319081 They simplify so far that it stops being an accurate explanation.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:16:44 2013 No.4319216 >>4319034 >Such a silly thing to even consider that all races are equal You're still not actually reading the book. It doesn't say that.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:18:44 2013 No.4319225

>>4319150
>other inmigrants's wrong actions are because they are from a different race.
> White's wrong actions cant be judged with our contemprary morals. Are "just part of history".

seems consistent.

Also you "white inmigrants" are still fucking up third world countries and the entire planetwith your mega-coorporations.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:21:44 2013 No.4319235

>>4319099
>I hardly ever heard anything positive from people with their encounters with different cultures

Useless anecdote.

Also if you're american we already experience a multitude of cultural influences on a regular basis. In fact it's probably so ingrained that you don't even register it as anything "different"(in this context 'different' meaning non-Anglo/non-west european).

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:24:45 2013 No.4319244

>>4319080
>But the entire book seems to be written from a viewpoint that has the urge to debunk the dangerous opinion that all races aren't equal
Pretty sure it isn't. Try reading at least the introduction, and keep your single-issue blinders as open as possible while you do so you can understand it properly, before you comment on what the book says. Sorry to be patronising, by the way- I'll stop if you can come up with a quote that says something to the effect of 'all races are equal'.

>But what it does mean is that its hard for multiple races to co-exist peacefully with one another when the differences between one another are too substantial to make a peaceful co-existion possible.
That would need to be proved. On the face of it the differences between genetic characteristics should hardly be as socially disruptive as, say, differences between religions or political ideologies.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:25:45 2013 No.4319245 >>4319209 Of course, but let's not educate our enemies.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:29:44 2013 No.4319266 >>4319149 There is no real european diversity in america, the vast vast majority is german or from the british isles.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:30:44 2013 No.4319268

It really bugs me when /pol/ uses the word 'multicultural' as if it means the same as 'multiracial'. I mean, come on. The black Americans you guys have such a problem with speak English, are generally protestant or non-religious, drink beer, eat much the same things, wear much the same clothes... where's the culture clash here?

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:34:44 2013 No.4319287

>>4319268
>It really bugs me when /pol/ uses the word 'multicultural' as if it means the same as 'multiracial'.

We're one and the same. To expand on your thought, it bothers me when Europeans rant about Islam, because they're really just saying they hate brown and black immigrants.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:34:44 2013 No.4319288 >>4319209 http://takimag.com/article/occams_butter_knife_steve_sailer_july_24

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:35:44 2013 No.4319293 >>4319268 There's basically a clash between racist shitheads who think black people should be discriminated against, and people who don't. The culture of judging people by how they look, against the culture of judging people by their actions.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:35:44 2013 No.4319298 >>4319172 >this is basically what you're saying That's not even close to what I was saying.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:37:44 2013 No.4319303

>>4319268
>at much the same things
>wear much the same clothes
>speak English
> non-religious
are you seriously out of your fucking mind? you obviously havent met the lowest 20% of the population, that or you are one. i have yet to meet one non-religious black

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:40:45 2013 No.4319310 >>4319293 judging people by their actions alone is racist too (disparate impact).

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:41:44 2013 No.4319315 >>4319303 >I have yet to meet one non-religious black I've met plenty. Also he did say Protestant or non-religious, and considering america is largely protestant they're even more assimilated. So what's your angle here?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:46:44 2013 No.4319323 >>4319315 He's trying to cause friction out of nothing. What an asshole...

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:46:44 2013 No.4319324 File: 14 KB, 373x182, African_American_Religion_chart.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4319315 >I've met plenty really now, you must run into that 13% an awful lot

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:48:44 2013 No.4319330

>>4319298

i was infact being charitable, the alternative is that youre wholly ignorant of the wide range of implications that results of the intersection of capacities vis cultural formation in reaction to environment, portending further changes to heredity over its history, such that it is viewed as 'least interesting' things.

which is also understandable if you mind, since there is not, after all, much material on verbotten areas of enquiry (i personally recommend nick land and steve sailer).

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:49:44 2013 No.4319335 >>4319324 if you live in civilization you'll meet educated black people

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:50:44 2013 No.4319340 >>4319330 if you like blogs, there also westhunter, hbdchick, and jaymans.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:51:44 2013 No.4319342 >>4319324 Holy shit, anon, you're aware that 13% of 42 million people is still quite a lot of people, yes?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:51:44 2013 No.4319344 >>4319335 yes, and?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:52:44 2013 No.4319347 >>4319342 you realize that 87% of 42 million is even larger yes? and on top of that that 87% is likely to be much more vocal on average than the 13%

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:53:45 2013 No.4319350

Any of the /pol/acks in here care to take up my challenge to find a part of this book that actually says 'all races are equal'? Because, y'know, that is what y'all keep saying you're arguing against and I'd hate for you to be fighting a strawman or anything silly like that.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:54:45 2013 No.4319356 >>4319175 >still posting this silly flawed infographic >still not understanding the difference between dating and fucking Business as usual.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:55:44 2013 No.4319361

>>4319347
The point is to prove that these people exist and that it's not crazy for anon to say he's met 'plenty' of them, anon. Nobody's saying non-religious black people are the majority or anything like that, so you might want to stop wasting your time tilting at that particular windmill.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 19:55:44 2013 No.4319362 >>4319347 there's an equal percentage of non-religious republicans but i don't see you calling them a different culture

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:00:44 2013 No.4319378

>>4319361
>The point is to prove that these people exist and that it's not crazy for anon to say he's met 'plenty' of them
im argueing its not that common, and on top of that youre not likely to know one is non-religious. so i would say "plenty of them" is a bit of an overstatement
>>4319362
>there's an equal percentage of non-religious republicans but i don't see you calling them a different culture
im not saying blacks are a different culture just because they are religious on average. that is quite an extraordinary conclusion from what i have written, a finely crafted strawman.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:01:44 2013 No.4319379 >>4319330 Have you read Land's books? His biggest influences are Bataille and French post-structuralists; he's not justifying your prejudices or arguing a "conservative" position when he critiques progressive universalism.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:03:44 2013 No.4319385 >>4319378 >im argueing its not that common Fair enough, based on the statistics I woudn't disagree. Now how does this relate to what we were discussing?

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:05:45 2013 No.4319391 >>4319378 your original point, "i have yet to meet one non-religious black," was directed at a comment saying multiracial =/= multicultural unless it wasn't you and you're just being pedantic for no particular reason

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:07:44 2013 No.4319397 >>4319378 >plenty of them is a bit of an overstatement Do you think everyone associates with the same sort of people?

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:08:44 2013 No.4319402

>>4319379

im referring to his most recent work on catallaxy/cybernetics, which he publishes online on his blog.

also, conservatism is more of an epistemology, not a position, modern conservatives are basically 'conserving' revolutionary left wing axioms (give your 'politics and the english language' another read).

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:11:44 2013 No.4319412 >>4316474 Anything remotely interesting that I don't like is a /pol/ thread. We should just stick to making threads bashing Ayn Rand and DFW, because those were apparently a thousand times better.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:15:44 2013 No.4319422 >>4319412 Problem is, /pol/ does have issues with reading. I mean look at this thread. I see no evidence here that anyone here arguing against this book has actually read it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:16:44 2013 No.4319427 >>4319422 ...and that includes the '/pol/ pretends not to be /pol/' OP. It really is just trolling, not that I personally have a problem with that. I do agree that it's interesting.

Anonymous Fri Nov 29 20:23:44 2013 No.4319449

>>4319079
>Even if it is a factor it's by far the least interesting one.
And that makes it any less true? You remind me of the academics from the Hjernevask documentaries:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp0yiw_hjernevask-brainwashing-english-part-6-race_news

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 03:16:53 2013 No.4320347 Please delete the posts in this thread that argued against the book and ban the users. Disagreement belongs on /pol/.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 03:37:41 2013 No.4320370 >>4319449 I actually just watched some of these earlier, very interesting show. Very unbiased too.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 03:54:41 2013 No.4320400 The only Jared you need to read is Jared Taylor.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 03:55:41 2013 No.4320401 >>4316151 Anti-European propaganda. Even if the information in it is factual (dubious) or its analyses felicitous (even more dubious) it is politically motivated and should be treated with caution.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:04:41 2013 No.4320418 >>4316678 >it was because farmers in middle-ages read Nietzsche and Socrates in their spare time. Sorry but the fact that you think some mediaeval farmer read Thus spoke Zarathustra is midn numbling. Look up Nietsche's birth dates.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:07:41 2013 No.4320420 >>4320418 I think he might have been being facetious bro.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:07:41 2013 No.4320422 >>4316627 >If the Chinese had discovered America first we would all be speaking Chinese right now. but anon, they did. where did you think the natives came from?

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:10:00 2013 No.4320427 >>4318294 >shitlord srs, pls

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:22:00 2013 No.4320443 >>4320422 Someone hasn't been reading the news lately. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/21/science/two-surprises-in-dna-of-boy-found-buried-in-siberia.html

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:25:59 2013 No.4320447 >>4316600 Seems like you are curious about the book because it will reinforce your beliefs? This book is very criticised amongst most scholar in the field of history and anthropology as well as geneticism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:35:59 2013 No.4320456 >>4318552 what's sci's general response then?

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 04:39:00 2013 No.4320460 >shitlord So the rumour was real?

Anonymous Sat Nov 30 05:28:59 2013 No.4320509

>>4316231
It's strange how it has become the norm to believe that skin color is the ONLY difference between peoples from different areas of the world.

If people have developed different levels of skin pigmentation, why is it crazy to think that they probably developed other minor physical traits as well?

It's not as if dark complexion is the only characteristic that could benefit people living in hot climates.

Hopefully this post makes sense. I haven't slept since Thursday morning.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 05:50:59 2013 No.4320522 >>4320509 Well I suppose the question is... has it become the norm? Who says this, other than the strawmen which /pol/ spends its life attacking? Because the book which this thread is about certainly doesn't say that.

Anonymous Sat Nov 30 12:35:52 2013 No.4321150

>>4316643
There backyard was twice the size of Europe and filled with tons of ethnic groups. They already traded with India and Indonesia, the land of Spices and gold. Their northern and western parts were the biggest desert in the world and a place filled with Steppe Nomads, who they've been fighting for thousands of years.

The fact that the people of China today all consider themselves Chinese (minus the Uyghers and Tibetans and a few Mongols) is an AMAZING feat that has yet to be replicated anywhere in the globe.

Anonymous Sat Nov 30 12:43:52 2013 No.4321176
File: 179 KB, 1155x852, 1374174608638.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

So basically:

>Wahhhhh, Jamal called me a cracka and those Chinks are speaking ching chong instead of English around me. I wish I was back in my barn fucking my sister. Why am I so fat? It's probably the Jews. I hate non whites. Muh culture. I'm going to go post on /pol/. Survival for the white race!

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 12:50:52 2013 No.4321204 >>4318861 That was an excellent book and should be compulsory in history classes in schools.

Anonymous Sat Nov 30 12:58:52 2013 No.4321226

>>4318596

I've also been told that "genetic distance" depends a lot on the genes you're using. For example, my professor used a genetic distance mapping of males and females for the sex gene and convinced a few of us that men and women are in fact on the way of being two divergent species.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 15:15:34 2013 No.4321599 >>4321176 >ultimate strawman /lit/'s intellectual peak everybody

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 15:37:22 2013 No.4321641 >>4321599 >Implying this isn't based satire Just swallow your tears.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 15:40:21 2013 No.4321648 >>4321641 >shitpost >b-but it was satire Sure thing buddy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 18:42:30 2013 No.4322138 >>4318506 >Racism is still stupid though >>4318921 >>4318921 Acknowledging racial average mental differences isn't racism, though.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 18:44:30 2013 No.4322143 >>4319109 >We will continue to unite as a species Becoming a big boring smear of low IQ brown = uniting? lol. >through love lol, confirmed troll.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 19:33:18 2013 No.4322336 >>4322138 How many races do you believe exist?

>>	Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Sat Nov 30 19:37:18 2013 No.4322350 >>4322138 Playing off pseudo-science that has been discredited decades ago is, however. /pol/ is like an inexplicable delay in space-time where everyone is at least 20 years behind the rest of the world.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 19:37:18 2013 No.4322353 File: 116 KB, 640x640, pol.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >this entire thread

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 19:45:18 2013 No.4322376 File: 168 KB, 446x357, 1358144126957.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4322353 >implying winning the debate >implying persecution

Anonymous Sat Nov 30 20:05:22 2013 No.4322431 [DELETED]

File: 926 KB, 1149x2476, S4s_Vs_srs.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

Friendly Reminder: The controversial online forum SRS which is home to socially retarded women with victim complexes is fond of using the made up term 'shitlord,' due to their hyper-sensitive tendancy to take offence at anything, including the words 'faggot,' 'retard,' 'cocksucker' and 'nigger.'

These rejects are usually the female equivalent of male stormfags, in that they have a religious belief in a secret society oppressing their every action, and promote logically bankrupt 3rd-wave feminism as a cry for more special treatment and protected persons status. They should be observed as a hilarious stereotype, and anything they say dismissed as the rant of a mentally stunted reject, usually due to being undesirable to partners in their life and rejection by their peers. They encourage racism and sexism against specific people as a childish way of 'getting even' for historical events they had no control over, rationalizing their hate and bigotry as socially acceptable due to a nebulous concept they define.

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 20:13:10 2013 No.4322464 >>4317450 >>4317450 cocksucking jew

Anonymous Sat Nov 30 20:21:08 2013 No.4322501

>>4319347
>and on top of that that 87% is likely to be much more vocal on average than the 13%
not necessarily, smaller groups often have a surprising amount of power due to a number of factors, including greater organizational capacity and a more unified mindset. The american political system should serve as an adequate example of this, even if we assume much of their power are simply the product of the enviroment

>>	Anonymous Sat Nov 30 23:49:07 2013 No.4323217 File: 144 KB, 984x636, 1353114669375.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4322350 Since when has the hereditarian position been discredited or based on pseudoscience in the first place?

Anonymous Sat Nov 30 23:56:07 2013 No.4323236

>>4323217
That's... I'm not saying it's bad, but it makes a ton of unproven assumptions, especially in the things that it describes as "emotional appeals" and therefore invalid. In particular, according to this, saying that intelligence is not a measure of human worth is an "emotional appeal" when it is clearly not - it is an argumentative statement, which you can agree with or argue against, but it is not an appeal to emotion except insofar as it is a position which people agree with. Human worth is or is not a product of intelligence; this is a thesis that we can evaluate. I have some issues with some of the other ones, too, but that's the most glaring error.

(Not that I'm necessarily accepting the conclusions of race science, but addressing the chart on the basis of its assumptions etc etc etc)

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 00:34:07 2013 No.4323370

The book is alright. There is a lack of direction in terms of understanding societies and ethics in the time periods and it also is a theory. His book is a theory like most of his books. None of it is factual.

The theories are sound to some extent, but there are numerous errors and personal biases that try to hard to paint whites as bad humans.

History is a long tale of culture shock and it continues today. The book provides some interesting ideas and facts, but overall it is empty and merely an opinion that you yourself have not formed.

Don't be a racist, but don't let Diamond form your opinion for you based on his theories. Read it, but with a grain of salt.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 01:09:08 2013 No.4323462 >>4316211 >WAIS and Stanford-Binet are good ways of measuring g-factor. Fuckouttahere

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 01:18:08 2013 No.4323479 >>4318294 >shitlord I'd rather have them than SRS, to be honest.

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 01:30:08 2013 No.4323495

>>4323217
>Since when has the hereditarian position been discredited or based on pseudoscience in the first place?

Since sociologists and humanities majors and liberals think a person with severe Downsyndrome and 40 IQ is just as intelligent as Einstein was.

The only difference is subjective and impossible to discern -- probably due to privilege and economic income and "culture"

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 01:33:08 2013 No.4323500 >>4323495 It isn't about being just as intelligent. It is about the potential to be. People attend university at all different times of their life. Some find their genius at 10, most at 30, and even some at 50 or 60.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 01:44:08 2013 No.4323520 >>4323495 >implying Einstein was more intelligent than a person with severe Downsyndrome http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Einsteinism

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 01:47:08 2013 No.4323525 >>4323520 Einstein is an easy reference, if I said Wernher von Braun no one would know who that was.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 02:04:08 2013 No.4323549 >>4316151 >Why isn't it required reading in all schools? That's why: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10455752.2013.846490?journalCode=rcns20&

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 02:07:08 2013 No.4323553 >>4316265 >great men and women of history >implying you are not thereby judging them

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 02:08:08 2013 No.4323557 >>4316283 Daily reminder that if you're not a radical conservative white supremacist, you're an ethnically jewish race-mixing transgendered homosexual muslim tumblr-running who believes that the straight white man is the worst thing to ever happen

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 02:20:09 2013 No.4323582 File: 3 KB, 122x125, 1368841204090.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4323557 >tfw my friend or my enemy mentality.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 02:21:08 2013 No.4323584 >>4323525 Fool, Gravity's Rainbow is one of the most widely read books amongst /lit/erati. He's quoted in the beginning.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 02:23:13 2013 No.4323588 >>4323525 Everybody knows Werner von Braun

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 02:30:16 2013 No.4323612 >>4323588 And Operation Paperclip.

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 03:56:05 2013 No.4323814

>>4318811
Spoiler alert, nobody ever actually found el dorado. Aside from potosi there was never really much in the way of actual riches from the americas. Sure colonialists had access to more and different resources giving them a market advantage, but that was a tad bit offset by the fact that it cost an assload to actually keep up an overseas empire. This was a time when overseas communication took half a year and you had a good chance of dying just from going from one place to the other.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 04:19:05 2013 No.4323866 >>4323814 >there was never really much in the way of actual riches from the americas Sugar.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 04:51:22 2013 No.4323931 File: 33 KB, 481x338, unnamed.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Daily Reminder: Everyone is equal and has the same intelligence potential.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 04:57:39 2013 No.4323947 >>4323866 And silver. That was actual bona fide treasure, that was.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 05:00:39 2013 No.4323951 >>4323931 Gee /pol/ you killed that strawman pretty hard. All those people who thought all humans are completely identical must be feeling pretty silly, I bet.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 05:03:39 2013 No.4323954 >>4323814 What is silver

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 05:03:39 2013 No.4323955 >>4323931 clearly its due to culture and politics. what else could cause differences among groups

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 05:03:39 2013 No.4323956 >>4323947 >precious metals >riches get a load of this mercantilist

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 05:04:39 2013 No.4323957 File: 39 KB, 311x500, carnage-and-culture.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316600 >Something slaughter something, maybe? Carnage and Culture?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 05:07:39 2013 No.4323959 >>4323956 While he said it was treasure, I don't think he made a claim about weather it was a good or bad thing?

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 05:14:39 2013 No.4323965

>>4323814
Silver from the Americas made the Spanish empire so powerful as to be nearly invincible until ignorance of economic theory caused them to bankrupt their nation to hell, and even after that the sugar from the Americas was enough to keep a diminished Spanish Empire intact long enough to be slapped by the US when its turn came.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 06:45:14 2013 No.4324077 >>4323951 You're one to talk about stawmen after this post>>4321176

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 06:48:14 2013 No.4324082 >>4324077 Yeah, I sure would be if that was me.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 06:55:15 2013 No.4324092 I don't understand the value in proving wether racial differences does or doesn't exist. If they don't, that's okay, if they do, so what?

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:02:47 2013 No.4324102

>>4324092
If they do, then you can split up humans by these differences and categorize. Then order these categories in a arbitrarily contrived hierarchy based on your individual or contemporary cultural aesthetic fancies. Then you have your foundation for treating people differently because suddenly, all aren't equal under the law (God) anymore and humanity has been set back 300 years.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:12:47 2013 No.4324113 >>4324102 If people aren't equal they shouldn't be treated as such. That's not moving backwards. Moving backwards is hindering the performance of the productive classes in pursuance of an equality that doesn't exist.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:14:47 2013 No.4324117 >>4323520 >http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Einsteinism LOL Back to Stormfront, you.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:16:48 2013 No.4324120 >>4324113 >If people aren't equal they shouldn't be treated as such Why shouldn't they have equal rights?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:20:47 2013 No.4324126 >>4324120 Why should thing that aren't equal be made equal? Why deny reality?

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:20:47 2013 No.4324127

>>4324113
>If people aren't equal they shouldn't be treated as such.

That depends if we decide that they are or not? It really depends on how you look at it: are we all essential human and have inherent equal value by this fact?
Or are we 7 billion different species whose unique since not two has a 100% shared biology or experience? Or would you prefer a contemporary arbitrary distinction based on the status quo and current political and social economical climate?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:23:47 2013 No.4324134 >>4324127 >a contemporary arbitrary distinction based on the status quo and current political and social economical climate? Affirmative Action.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:24:50 2013 No.4324136 >>4324127 >even if people aren't equal, my feelings say they should be Egalitarian logic in a nutshell.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:27:49 2013 No.4324141 >>4321648 It was a satire of /pol/shits, not /lit/, you cretin.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:29:49 2013 No.4324145 File: 26 KB, 460x326, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4324136 Please elaborate?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:32:49 2013 No.4324150 >>4323520 So there actually still are people who reject judische Physik? /Pol/tards are even more stupid than I would have thought. Is this an example of right-wing rationality, /pol/?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:34:50 2013 No.4324151 >>4324134 Exactly, I would prefer the universalist approach instead of special rights that does nothing, but feed suspicions of idiots and draws even more distinct lines in the sand.

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:39:49 2013 No.4324159

>>4324102

There you go. /pol/tards keep on arguing about this race being on average better than that race.

And despite their incessant cherry picking, uncritical and unscientific attitude modern science indicates certain contested possibilities that would favor their view.

After they have established this factoid, they somehow convinced themselves the hard work is over and the foundations their racialist, discriminatory ideology are laid. But nothing of that kind has done.

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:40:49 2013 No.4324161

>>4324126
Equal rights doesn't require that people be equal in terms of intelligence, strength, attractiveness, or anything like that- not sure how you get the idea that it does. It simply depends on a minimum shared humanity: that we are all conscious of our existence as individuals, and should therefore be entitled to the same level of protection as humans. What's your alternative proposal? Which groups of humans do you propose to deny which human rights to, and why?

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:41:49 2013 No.4324163
File: 13 KB, 200x200, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>4324126
>Why deny reality?

Reality is what we say it is, was the reality of the superstitious stone-age man less real than the reality of contemporary scientific man?

It's all about consensus, the world is made of language and our language determines what we perceive as real. We talk the world into existence.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:43:49 2013 No.4324165 >>4324113 >hindering the performance of the productive classes in pursuance of an equality that doesn't exist Please, tell me how equal rights have hindered "the performance of the productive classes". I'm very interested.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:46:50 2013 No.4324168 >>4324117 Those little stars of David after every Jewish person.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 07:47:50 2013 No.4324172 >>4324161 >we are conscious and should therefore be entitled to the same level of protection as humans Proof?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:04:49 2013 No.4324187 >>4324172 Are you a solipsist? Do you sincerely believe that no one else but you posses thought? Are everyone else but you mindless illusions put there by an evil demon to annoy you?

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:06:49 2013 No.4324192

>>4324172
Any kind of social interaction would do it. Obviously you can't observe every single human interacting, but since all the interaction observed does indicate self-consciousness, it makes sense to consider it the norm, no? What examples of non self-aware healthy adult humans can you find?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:13:49 2013 No.4324205 File: 43 KB, 294x371, image.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4324172 Why Kant you see?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:14:50 2013 No.4324209 >>4324187 >>4324192 >>4324205 Not a single argument. Still waiting.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:18:49 2013 No.4324218 >>4324209 In fact, there were 3 arguments, that's easily observable. That you might lack the knowledge and mental faculty to comprehend their implications and construct a rebuttal doesn't make them non-arguments.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:19:49 2013 No.4324222 >>4316306 Given that one contextless picture, I'm inclined to agree with you. Fedora off to you, good sir.

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:35:49 2013 No.4324266

China did discover the New World, you fuckwit. Read 1421.

China wasn't always insular. At one point, they were regularly sending trade ships down to India, Arabia, and even southern/eastern Africa. They found the New World, but then the politics of China changed and they retreated from the world and became insular.

The reason Europe got so far is because they had an opposite reaction; they went from insular to expansive.

>>4316151

Because it isn't that factually sound. It created a big ripple initially in academia, but after a few years it became apparent to many historians that Jared Diamond did not do all of his homework, and that his thesis and supporting arguments were sometimes lacking or even suspect in their evidence.

It shouldn't be required reading because it lacks the veracity to be that important. It's important because it posits several engaging historiographical viewpoints regarding the development of societies throughout history, but it is not some kind of magnum opus that represents a paradigm shift in the way we think of history or how we approach it.

Simply put, it's not that impressive of a work. It's not that well-researched, it's not that well-developed, and it isn't nearly as influential as its most ardent proponents sincerely wish it was. It was a good book with an interesting theory, but it didn't quite pan out.

At best, it should be read by history majors or historians seeking to compare and contrast various views of the how and why of history.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 08:51:49 2013 No.4324305 >>4324266 Best post ITT

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 09:12:49 2013 No.4324361

>>4324266
>Read 1421
Try googling that book and you'll find an absolute shit-ton of debunking by actual professional historians. It's true that China wasn't always insular (even after they 'retreated from the world', in fact), but the 'China discovered America' thing is generally agreed by people who know what they're talking about to be bollocks.

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 10:21:49 2013 No.4324475

>>4324266

I think the book is great, but Diamond's method is simply a sort of environmental reductionism. However, his method did develop a new historical interest in environmental and ecological factors and sprouted a lot of research.

A similar but book which has the same problem but worse is Dawkins "selfish gene". Great read but it reduces the human social interaction to genetics without explaining how and why this happens. But it does make you change your perspective.

I think, if you have one of these great new visions, it's permitted to be a bit loose on the details to make your view stick more with the reader. It's better to be studied and criticized than not to be talked about at all.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 10:23:49 2013 No.4324479 >>4324475 >without explaining how and why this happens did you even read the book? hint: it has to do with evolution

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 10:30:45 2013 No.4324491 File: 19 KB, 300x450, the-modern-world-system-i[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4324266 Any thoughts on Wallerstein/world systems theory?

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:23:33 2013 No.4324599

>>4323236
>saying that intelligence is not a measure of human worth is an "emotional appeal" when it is clearly not
Intelligence is absolutely a measure of human worth insofar as a humans' ability to contribute to maintaining and progressing a modern civilization.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:24:34 2013 No.4324604 >>4322350 >human evolution stopped at the neck, hurr Which pseudo-science would that be?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:37:33 2013 No.4324654 >>4324604 What makes you think the tripfriend said that?

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:37:33 2013 No.4324655

>>4324475

It's not a new view or interest, though. Environmental determinism isn't new in historical academia. It's been around for quite some time, and has always been a strand of thought in historiography.

I really don't think a person attempting to write history has permission to be "loose" with their facts, or with the lines they draw between their thesis and supporting argument. Either you're writing pop history or you're writing history with the intent of making a very strong argument aimed to impact the field of study or the field's approach to a specific topic. If you're doing the former, then it's not a big deal. If you're doing the latter, you have absolutely no excuse for not trying to make your arguments and research air-tight.

And frankly, Guns, Germs, and Steel is really pop geo-history. It's not that big of a deal, nor is it treading new ground. All it does is retread and emphasize a particular strand of historiography, and it doesn't necessarily do a great job at it.

Don't get me wrong, when you're talking history you want to keep abreast of things like geography, climate, and the like in regards to how a civilization develops. But that's not new ground, and the way in which Diamond does it is not especially impressive.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:41:33 2013 No.4324674 File: 432 KB, 1100x736, 1385241977897.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4316151

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:44:33 2013 No.4324686 File: 65 KB, 642x482, 1351569015675.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>4322350 fat

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:48:33 2013 No.4324699 I'm more interested in this >>4323957 now. Has anyone read it?

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:48:33 2013 No.4324701 >>4324686 >W-e're n-not from /pol/... we're intellectuals with actual arguments!

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:51:33 2013 No.4324709 >>4324701 Forgot your name, tubby :^)

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:51:33 2013 No.4324710 >>4324491 It's pretty based, although my knowledge of it is superficial at best.

>>	Anonymous Sun Dec 1 11:57:33 2013 No.4324732 >>4324674 >Arguing against a comic >using the word objective in historic, political, humanities or socio-economic contexts My God!

Anonymous Sun Dec 1 12:00:33 2013 No.4324738

>>4324491

His core/periphery idea in regards to countries is kind of a big deal, but some other aspects of his theory are, if I recall correctly, a touch wobbly.

But then again, that's often the case with such a macro approach to world history. More often than not, we tend to take some things from these broad, sweeping theories and discard others. It's hard to find a universal theory for human history that is completely and totally sound; more often than not it's sound in some places and suspect in others.

I'd place Wallerstein's work higher than Diamond's by a big leap though, because Wallerstein contributed a viewpoint that is both robust and expansive that can play counter point to other theories of human history, whereas Diamond is just fixated on environmental determinism.

>>	Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ Sun Dec 1 18:28:07 2013 No.4326067 >>4324686 Though I agree with the Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ above, he was not me. You missed. (Saging and re-closing this thread. I've no desire to bring this back)

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/lit/ - Literature