What do you think?
Rate this book
Guns, Germs, and Steel
Please note that the content of this book primarily consists of articles available from Wikipedia or other free sources online. Guns, Germs, and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies is a 1997 book by Jared Diamond, professor of geography and physiology at the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA). In 1998 it won a Pulitzer Prize and the Aventis Prize for Best Science Book. A documentary based on the book and produced by the National Geographic Society was broadcast on PBS in July 2005.
140 pages, Paperback
First published March 8, 2010
About the author
Frederic P. Miller
2,491 books146 followersThis is the 'editor' of many books based upon Wikipedia articles.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
May 16, 2015
I didn’t finish the book :( it’s an interesting book that tries to address fundamental questions of global power and inequality. Yet for my own reading preference, it’s too academic to fully enjoy. Alternatively, this can be a fascinating documentary series, and I found one!
http://www.pbs.org/gunsgermssteel/show/
http://www.pbs.org/gunsgermssteel/show/
December 28, 2014
I'm late to the party, but what on earth was this?
I read this as my professor mentioned it in a lecture. But...
Where do I start...?
Generally his thesis is entirely weak. He sets out to answer the question of why some societies were more advanced than others, despite some continents, starting out earlier than others. Of course a geographer would conclude that geography influences human societies the most. Yeah bro its called ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINISM. Not a new idea.
He looks to fill his work with needless, tiresome and incoherent sermons on agriculture, which to his credit, were vaguely interesting, particularly the parts on crop staples and plant domestication. But as I mentioned, they were simply boring, and unnecessary as factors strengthening his thesis.
But it was his final word on trying to turn history into a science. turning a humanities subject into an objective empirical discipline. This was the final point which sealed it for me. it proved the fact that he has tried to balance too many fields, without a deeper knowledge of the intricacies of the disciplines he was using. I understand it is a short book and he couldn't possibly have managed to include everything on the subject in one book. But he asks a big question, which would naturally necessitate a big answer. I'm no doctorate, but even I can see he has not explored all of the possible research in answering his question.
This scathing review has, I'm sure, been mirrored by previous readers, and I am in no doubt that I am not alone in my opinion. Perhaps the Geographer, should just stay as well... A geographer.
Final verdict by this undergraduate:
Weak. Weak. Weak.
I read this as my professor mentioned it in a lecture. But...
Where do I start...?
Generally his thesis is entirely weak. He sets out to answer the question of why some societies were more advanced than others, despite some continents, starting out earlier than others. Of course a geographer would conclude that geography influences human societies the most. Yeah bro its called ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINISM. Not a new idea.
He looks to fill his work with needless, tiresome and incoherent sermons on agriculture, which to his credit, were vaguely interesting, particularly the parts on crop staples and plant domestication. But as I mentioned, they were simply boring, and unnecessary as factors strengthening his thesis.
But it was his final word on trying to turn history into a science. turning a humanities subject into an objective empirical discipline. This was the final point which sealed it for me. it proved the fact that he has tried to balance too many fields, without a deeper knowledge of the intricacies of the disciplines he was using. I understand it is a short book and he couldn't possibly have managed to include everything on the subject in one book. But he asks a big question, which would naturally necessitate a big answer. I'm no doctorate, but even I can see he has not explored all of the possible research in answering his question.
This scathing review has, I'm sure, been mirrored by previous readers, and I am in no doubt that I am not alone in my opinion. Perhaps the Geographer, should just stay as well... A geographer.
Final verdict by this undergraduate:
Weak. Weak. Weak.
March 6, 2015
This is an excellent book. The book aimed to answer the following questions - "Why did human development proceed at such different rates on different continents?", "Why were Europeans, rather than Africans or native Americans, the ones to end up on top?"
I learned that history followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples' environments, not because of biological differences.
I learned that history followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples' environments, not because of biological differences.
April 27, 2014
I finally got to reading this book and was not disappointed! It introduced me to a way of viewing history, through geographical and other boundaries, that is not only very appealing but seems to explain a lot of the differences in the fate of people throughout the world.
October 16, 2018
This is an epic read. It strives to answer the question of why some people conquered (like the Europeans) and others were conquered (like the Native Americans). The short answer is geography, the long answer is this book. It truly was fascinating. I feel smarter for my time with this book.
July 23, 2019
First non-fiction I have read in quite a while. Having majored in sociology and minored in anthropology, this book is a joy to read. It also re-introduced me to serious readingthat I have neglected on the years.
January 4, 2019
Good book to make you seem smart at cocktail parties, but I don't feel too personally enriched by reading this.
July 3, 2019
Really interesting broad scope of human history
April 29, 2015
This is another one of those books that's probably a better "read" than "listen." Though it's mostly things you should have learned in Social Studies 101 - had you been paying attention.
After 5 hours of "lecture," Diamond says the development of civilizations - why some cultures developed quicker and became more sophisticated than others has to do with the environment. Societies that domesticated plants and animals made more significant cultural, civic, and technological advances sooner than peoples who lived in less hospitable environments.
After 5 hours of "lecture," Diamond says the development of civilizations - why some cultures developed quicker and became more sophisticated than others has to do with the environment. Societies that domesticated plants and animals made more significant cultural, civic, and technological advances sooner than peoples who lived in less hospitable environments.
November 8, 2014
Interesting book, very unique. It explains why some societies and countries are move advanced than other. On the bigger level it makes a lot of sense. I found it particulary interesting that a certain amount of competition boosts growth and eventually is a good thing.
Guns, Germs and Steel
- Competition is important to progress and pushing yourself
- Countries are doing good/bad today due to their ancestor's environments and availalbe resources
Guns, Germs and Steel
- Competition is important to progress and pushing yourself
- Countries are doing good/bad today due to their ancestor's environments and availalbe resources
May 29, 2015
Traces the advancement of human civilization quite well. Detailed notes and theory. Links the binding factors from hunter-gatherer stage to food production.
Cons:
1) Too much focus on Australian Aborigines and New Guinea. These are significant but there have been much larger civilizations that have influenced the advent of human history
2) Indus valley and Mesopotamia forgotten completely
3) Wars and expansion not covered at all which played a major role in spread of human civilization
Cons:
1) Too much focus on Australian Aborigines and New Guinea. These are significant but there have been much larger civilizations that have influenced the advent of human history
2) Indus valley and Mesopotamia forgotten completely
3) Wars and expansion not covered at all which played a major role in spread of human civilization
December 3, 2014
This explains everything. Every time there is a discussion regarding history or culture, I think back to this book and wish everyone were required to read it. Basically, I think it should be mandatory reading before entering nay discussion on the internet.
February 12, 2015
I really enjoyed this book. I have to admit that there were times when it dragged on, but it gave me a lot better understanding of how the modern world was shaped and the influences of geography, disease, technology, etc. I highly recommend reading this book.
April 9, 2015
The book contains lots of interesting information, but it's presented in a very unexciting way. Although the book is short at 140 pages it still feels like it drags. Only recommended for people with a deep love of history and civilization.
November 1, 2016
This should be part of every high school history class. The book was well written, interesting, and accessible.
July 1, 2014
Fascinating book on how little things can dramatically affect the course of history.
August 27, 2014
Very interesting concepts, and a thought provoking combination of science and humanities.
September 4, 2014
loved this book.
November 25, 2014
Enlightning Book - Worth reading a second time
April 16, 2015
A bit dry, but still a decent read.
January 16, 2015
Very interesting and appealing theory about the development of different civilizations. Easy to read for a historic book.
Read
February 23, 2015wrong book
April 4, 2015
Well written and thought out explanations for anthropological mysteries. Not as good as Collapse.
Read
July 27, 2015a fabulous piece of journalism, a wonderful exploration into why white Europeans and their descendants have so much and the native peoples they displaced have so little.
June 19, 2015
Took me a while. But very informative.
January 14, 2017
Very detailed, great insights into how mankind has evolved. At times a bit lengthy.
September 13, 2012
Loved this book!
Read
April 27, 2018enjoyed
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews