Blog Response #1 - Guns, Germs, & Steel Excerpts 1-3
COMMENT - Day 1:
Part A: Answering Yali's Question
Many possible answers to Yali's question have been posed over time.
Which theory do you find the most interesting? Why?
(Possible theories include genetics, climate, irrigation, and the fact that Europeans developed
guns, germs, and steel before others (but this doesn't answer the question WHY they did this)).
Part A: Answering Yali's Question
Many possible answers to Yali's question have been posed over time.
Which theory do you find the most interesting? Why?
(Possible theories include genetics, climate, irrigation, and the fact that Europeans developed
guns, germs, and steel before others (but this doesn't answer the question WHY they did this)).
In a detailed blog comment, support your findings.
You must have at least one piece of evidence from the text to support your opinion.
Part B: Identifying Emerging TopicsYou must have at least one piece of evidence from the text to support your opinion.
Review your list of Emerging Topics. Which one are you most interested in pursuing at this time?
1. Identify the topic and which excerpt it came from (this should include a quote).
2. Explain why this topic is "speaking to you."
REPLIES - DAY 2: Read through the posted blog comments. Reply to TWO other students regarding their thoughts for either Part A or Part B.
The theory I found the most interesting was the climate theory. I found the climate theory the most interesting because the author uses good evidence as to why it could be a theory and why it would make sense. On page 1 of excerpt 3 of Guns, Germs, and Steel the author claims that, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. This would prove his theory because people that live in colder climates would have to advance more to survive their climate while the people that live in warmer climates would not have to advance much because their weather is not going to be as threatening to them.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic I am the most interested in is the ice age because I have never really learned about the ice age besides the basics. This topic came from page 1 of the first excerpt in Guns, Germs,and Steel. The author says that, “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies”. I am interested in seeing the impacts the ice age had on the world and what caused it.
While I can see the points trying to be made, I have to politely disagree with the claims and the evidence about climate affecting daily living. Civilizations living in frigid temperatures aren't always negatively affected. Take for example, the country Finland. Finland has some of the coldest winters in the world, but the people don't let it slow them down or affect the way they live. People who live in any environment learn to adapt to it and overcome any obstacles that come as a result of it.
DeleteI agree with you, because it would make sense for colder climates to advance more because they are more threatened than if you lived in a warmer climate, they have to build houses fit for that environment, make warmer clothes like you said. But on the other hand I also think Hunter had a good argument too, "People who live in any environment learn to adapt to it and overcome any obstacles that come as a result of it."
DeleteI completely agree with you because while there is warm weather it is easier to make inventions and there would be no rush for the safety of the people because are bodies are more effective with normal warm weather. In difference though while were in the cold weather we tend to be more rushed to take care more of our safety and we move more to make sure we are safe and we invent more and can advance faster than warm climate regions. It all makes sense with this quote On page 1 of excerpt 3 of Guns, Germs, and Steel when the author claims that, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. So therefor I agree with you.
DeleteI can see as to where this theory is a good explanation to answer Yali's question. Even though now days this theory could be argued to be true. I can understand how the cold weather could have made people more productive in the past because they had to "build a warm home and make warm clothing", however now we already have all the things we need to survive the winter, we already have a home, warm clothes and ways of getting food without even leaving the house. Even so it's a good theory and a good explanation to Yali's question.
DeleteI agree with you because it make sense that the colder climates had a to advance more because the weather was threatening if you lived in a warmer climate. If you look at we live in Wisconsin and we experience with both warmer and colder climates, we have to prepare for the colder months of the year compared to the warmer weather.
DeleteI agree with you, it makes since that people in warmer climates may be less inclined to advanced, due it being much easier to survive in that climate. Most ideas come to increase people's quality of life, and when people don't feel the need to increase their quality of life, they do not feel the need to advance
DeleteOther people had more than others because of how they came up and how they pursued their goals and careers and were successful with what they were doing helped them get more and afford the more luxury items and the people that didn't have as much as a income couldn't afford the things people with more had.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you but, also keep in mind that we were all treated different and we weren't all presented with the same "cargo" that the white people had. I like how you said, "How they came up" but also think about the book; how did the white people come up bigger and better than the blacks. what did they do different?
DeleteThe only reason the whites got treated better than the blacks was because of the rights that were put in place at the time and the blacks were used as field and house slaves and the whites got treated like gods.
DeleteI feel like his argument about europeans having more than others. In excerpt three he was talking about how other countries that have more and can conquer other countries will have more then some because the more countries they conquered then they will have more supplies. I found this interesting because people that have less have a harder time protecting themselves then who have more but when someone conquers them they could have nothing.
ReplyDeleteI some what agree with what you're saying. They more than likely advanced more because of the simple fact that they automatically had those resources to do so. For example, at one point in time Asia was a very prominent place. They had everything and sure maybe they dominated smaller parts of the world but eventually they fell off. Why? Isn’t that prominence just an ephemeral phenomenon of the last few centuries which, is now fading behind the prominence of Japan and Southeast Asia?
DeleteI also find it interesting because that's really how it was throughout history. WWII, Germany was able to conquer so much of Europe because they just had so much more than the other countries. I do think he's right about other countries having more can conquer the countries with less because throughout history, it's just proven itself.
DeleteThe theory that’s most intriguing to me is idea that Europeans developed guns, germs, and steel before everyone else. This would give them an advantage because, it allows them to defend themselves better, make new things and it allows them to use diseases and viruses as weapons. According to Jared Diamond, “Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests.” Though, the author does claim that this hypothesis is incomplete, due to the fact that there is no “why” in the explanation.
ReplyDeleteThe topic that I was intrigued by is, “As a society grows, it consumes others.” I found this topic on page 2 of Excerpt 2. This topic is really the only one that seems intriguing
I agree with you completely, do you think it was their plan to go on conquests after they found out that they could make steel weapons?
DeleteI think that the weapons and tools they built were built for self defense. But they realized later that they can go explore and conquer.
DeleteKadin i also find that Europeans developed guns germs and steel interesting. i wrote the same thing almost but what i think is weird is why would Jared Diamond write this Hypothesis and not finish with it. like i feel like if he really strongly thought that would would finish his idea.
DeleteSam i agree with you I think that once they found out they could make steel weapons and had an upper hand on people i think they planned on going on a conquest to see what else they could have done.
DeleteI agree with you about the explanation of Europeans being the first people to create "Guns, Germs, and Steel," however, one thing that I disagree with is that even when Europeans created things that are destructive and deadly, Diamond also had pointed out that anyone could create those types of items, such as how it was told on Page 2 of Excerpt 3, "why were Europeans, rather than Africans or Native Americans, the ones to end up with guns, the nastiest germs, and steel?...... If a long head start counts for anything, why didn’t guns and steel arise first in Africa, permitting Africans and their germs to conquer Europe? And what accounts for the failure of Aboriginal Australians to pass beyond the stage of hunter-gatherers with stone tools?"
DeleteI agree that because Europeans had access to weaponry and metal and were also immune to infectious diseases they were more advanced and had more. I think that this posts a really good point to the question on why white people have more. In the text it says "Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests".
DeleteKadin, I agree extensively with your idea. If Jared Diamond were to finish his theory? What do you think he would've said?
DeleteYes the people would get guns but, they would also need some sort of training also to be able to know how to use the gun properly, Also the Europeans are weaponized first because they had a lot of threats to their country and no choice but to adapt to the threats.
DeleteYour point is makes a lot of sense. If the Europeans made did have guns, germs, and steel first they would have the best advantage to be more advanced. With the guns they could defend themselves better and could make strong structures with the steel and gain more advanced skills.
DeleteKadin I completely agree with you because with all of these advancements in knowledge it puts them many years ahead of everyone. I don't believe their initial intention was to take over places but they noticed they could when all their self defense was working so well in their favor.
DeleteI completely agree Kadin, the Europeans had such an advantage compared to others in the same time frame. The question is why did they have such an upper hand, was it the location, the amount of people. If you were to have and idea why, what do you think it would be?
DeleteThe theory I find most intriguing is biology and genetics. People actually believed that Europeans were superior to ALL other people. European explorers became aware of the wide differences among the world’s peoples in technology and political organization. They assumed that those differences rose from differences in inherent ability. “With the rise of Darwinian theory, explanations were recast in terms of natural selection and of evolutionary descent. Technologically primitive peoples were considered evolutionary vestiges of human descent from apelike ancestors. The displacement of such peoples by colonists from industrialized societies exemplified the survival of the fittest. With the later rise of genetics, the explanations were recast once again, in genetic terms. Europeans became considered genetically more intelligent than Africans, and especially more so than Aboriginal Australians.” I believe this is because of how developed they became. They developed guns, germs and steel. Isn’t that prominence just an ephemeral phenomenon of the last few centuries?
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you Kelly!! You made your point clear and made things easier to visualize!!
DeleteI agree with you about the theory of biology and genetics being the result of Europeans invading lands around the world, since Diamond says in Page 2 of Excerpt 2, "educated white Americans, Europeans, and Australians, when the subject of Australian Aborigines comes up, assume that there is something primitive about the Aborigines themselves. They certainly look different from whites. Many of the living descendants of those Aborigines who survived the era of European colonization are now finding it difficult to succeed economically in white Australian society." From his explanation of biology and genetics, Europeans would think of people with different skin color or genes of their race, to not act or speak like them, and would not have anything to do with them.
DeleteI disagree with you, I believe that nobody can be born intelligent, intelligence is something that one can gain through studying, and working, but not through just being born a separate race. What factors do you think can make one community more intelligent then another, other then genetics?
DeleteI agree with you, they assume the biological differences from technology and from the different inherent abilities of European explorers and just like the Darwin theory, they see the displacements and the survival of the fittest.
DeleteThe theory that I find the most interesting is the climate theory. I find the climate theory the most interesting because if feel it has the strongest evidence to answer Yali’s question. On page 1 of excerpt 3 the author states that, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. This is strong evidence to prove his theory because it states that people that live in cooler climates have to develop more “cargo” to survive. While people that live in the warmer climates don’t need as much “cargo” to survive. The emerging topic that I found the most interesting so far has been how has the ice age changed the world. This topic of the ice age came from page 1 of except 1 and the author states, “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools.” This topic of the ice age speaks to me because I want to find how the Ice age changed the world, and what event caused the ice age in the first place.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that people that live in colder climates had to have more "cargo" to survive the weather.
DeleteI also agree with Samuel and Tyler about how people that live in colder climates had to have more "cargo" to survive the weather.
DeleteI agree with you because it make sense that the colder climates had a to advance more because the weather was threatening if you lived in a warmer climate. If you look at we live in Wisconsin and we experience with both warmer and colder climates, we have to prepare for the colder months of the year compared to the warmer weather. But if you also look at people dont really want to be outside if is really hot or extremely cold
DeleteI agree with you because I believe that colder climates led those societies to become more advanced. I also said in my comment that the climate theory was the most interesting to me as well.
DeleteI agree that a warm climate would lead to laziness whereas a cold climate forces people to create technologies in order to survive. I also think that people from colder climates had to learn more about their environments than people from warmer climates.
DeleteI agree that most people who lived in colder weather climates had a lot more cargo to carry for preparation for the weather and then societies would think about more technology to use for colder climates.
DeleteThe theory I thought that would answer Yali's question to his satisfaction and was most interesting was #4: Access to advanced capabilities. Now why I think that is because civilizations that have flourished because of the metals that are underground. Europe, America, Japan all these countries exploded in population, increase in money, military power. In Japan around 1400’s Bushi(or Samurai) had extremely valuable metals crafted for their weapons the katana. One could say location has a really big influence in what Yali referred to as cargo.
ReplyDeleteNow to talk about the topic in the prologue. The topic that really stuck with me was on irrigation from excerpt 3 and the effects that it has on a civilization. Irrigation is the application of controlled amounts of water to plants at needed intervals or times. Irrigation helps to grow agricultural crops. So basically grow food to live.
I agree with you. It would make sense that the Europeans advanced much faster because they started using metals. With an increase in military power, they would be able to take control much easier. One question that may need to be answered about this theory is were the Europeans the only ones who used steel at the time?
DeleteThe theory on climate is interesting because in the excerpts Diamond talks about the climate and how the Europeans got stuff they needed because they lived in a cold climate. “A Genetic Explanation isn’t the only possible answer to Yali’s question. Another one, popular with inhabitants of northern Europe, invokes the supposed stimulatory effects of their homeland’s cold climate and the inhibitory effects of hot, humid, tropical climates on human creativity and energy.” This is from excerpt 3 that Diamond talks about this.
ReplyDeleteOne of the emerging topics that interests me is the one when Diamond talks about in excerpt 3 What are proto-humans? “While some progress has been made in identifying those ultimate causes in the case of Europe’s conquest of the New World, Africa remains a big puzzle. Africa is the continent where proto-humans evolved for the longest time, where anatomically modern humans may also have arisen, and where native diseases like malaria and yellow fever killed European explorers.” This speaks to me because i've never heard of proto-humans till I read this excerpt and it's really weird and interesting that I might want to learn more about it.
What I found most interesting was the impact of climate. I chose this one because the author had some good points that seemed to make sense, “In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious.” I think he had good theory, because people who live in harsh conditions will have to be more advanced in some ways, like warmer clothes, a house that can withstand those conditions, and much more. Even though it was proven that more ideas came from warmer climates, I still think the theory itself isn't to far out there.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic I am most interested in he the cause and effect of genocide in excerpt one on page three there is a quote that says, “Many other indigenous populations—such as native Hawaiians, Aboriginal Australians, native Siberians, and Indians in the United States, Canada, Brazil, Argentina, and Chile—became so reduced in numbers by genocide and disease that they are now greatly outnumbered by the descendants of invaders.” I am most interested to find out why this happened, how it happened, and what it take to wipe out populations so big, and so diverse.
I also found the impact of climate an interesting theory to Yali's question. I agree with the author when he said cold climates require people to adapt and further advance to prepare for the climate and like that you included that as evidence. I think in certain places the theory is true and in other places the theory is wrong. I think its interesting just because of how true it can be and how wrong it can be at the same time.
DeleteYou make a very valid point. Due to the standards to survive in colder climates it would have to be more advanced than tropical/warmer climate. For example, winter can be harsh in Wisconsin. We have to bundle up and keep warm to survive whereas in the summer time it requires less effort.
DeleteI also found the climate theory very interesting, and agree that the author makes a valid point in the excerpt. Colder places such as Wisconsin can have harsh weather, making us plan ahead and be ready for the weather, while warmer places do not have to plan ahead as much.
DeleteI agree with you, people who live in colder climates have to put in more effort to better themselves so they can keep themselves warm, but do you think people who live in warmer climates have to do more or less work?
DeleteYeah I agree with your emerging topic, because I have never heard much about this genocide and would be a interesting topic to know about. Do you know the number of people that died? Also on why they choose to kill them? Could there had been a fear of the New Guinean's?
DeleteWhat stood out most to me was the climate change, I found that theory the most interesting. This theory stood out to me because of how much evidence the author used on the climate. On page 1 of of excerpt 3 of Guns, Germs and Steel the author claims that, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. This proves his theory because people that live in a warm climate won't have to worry too much about surviving and creating advances that will help them survive meanwhile the people that live in colder climates they will need to advance faster to help them survive with the cold climate.
ReplyDeleteAn emerging topic that truly stood out to me and I want to know more about is the ice age. I barely know much about it and the way the author was talking about it truly got my attention to know more about it. This topic comes from page 1 of the first excerpt in Guns, Germs,and Steel. The author says that, “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies”. Global warming can be a major factor of why the ice age has changed so much throughout the years and I am very curious to find out how much we have changed it through time.
I agree that the climate change theory is one of the interesting theory's in the excerpt because it talks about how the people at the time had to survive during the cold climates. And people in the warmer climates did not have to worry about building fireplaces to keep warm or other ways to keep warm. So the people in the colder climates did have to find ways to keep warm during the winter.
DeleteI agree with the climate change because he explains how in the colder climates you have to do more in order to survive compared to the hotter climates.
DeleteThe climate change topic is very interesting because here in Wisconsin people don't get as much done and like staying inside during the winter, but during the summer we are outside all the time and are getting more work done.
DeleteI agree with you on this. I thought it didn't really make sense when he said people in colder climates had to work harder, it didn't really make sense because in a colder climate, it would make more sense for the people who live there to just try and survive the cold, not invent new things
DeleteI find the climate topic interesting because we have a real world experience here because hunting season is in winter and it shows that is when you have to work harder for food and everything. Like yes we're in the 21st century and its easy to access food but when it wasn't as easy you had to work harder during winter than summer for that food.
DeleteI also thought that the ice age topic was very interesting because most of us don't really know much about the ice age. Before reading excerpt 1, I didn't think about the ice age having such an big impact on the people, and how they were placed in different locations. But it is also interesting that they all learned how to survive and how they all adapted to the location.
DeleteI also agree with you on the climate topic I also talked about that. With people living in colder climates have to worry about more and with people living in warmer climate don't really have to worry about much. I also think the ice age was a very interesting topic.
DeleteI agree with you that climate change was a very important reason on why some were more developed than others, like how it says that people in colder climates had to develop faster than others to survive the temperatures. While others would possibly more more relaxed and spend time on other things.
DeleteI agree on what you said about the climate theory because there are less needs in warmer climate areas than cold areas.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhat was the example of "natural superiority" the text used?
DeleteThe theory that I find the most interesting is the Climate theory because the fact that warm weather makes people more lazy and makes them not want to do anything, while in cold weather the people have to survive so they must build warm environments for their families in order to survive. The warmer climates have less than colder climates if you look at the places on the Earth this is completely true. Therefore the people who have adapted and had to survive they have more than the people who have not had to try and to survive to cold weather. " In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious. "
ReplyDeleteThe topic that I am most interested in is Survival of the fittest because I want to know what it takes and how people had to evolve to survive to create a great community. Certain people evolved more than others, " The displacement of such peoples by colonists from industrialized societies exemplified the survival of the fittest. With the later rise of genetics, the explanations were recast once again, in genetic terms." This means the survival of the fittest is just for the strongest of the humans and the smartest to survive and create a better environment for future generations.
I'd have to disagree with you on your view of the climate theory. The theory did not say that warm weather caused people to become lazy while cold weather made people smart, the theory stated that cold weather required more sophisticated technology, such as permanent standing structures, warmer clothing, and tools to acquire less available resources than in warmer climates like water and edible plants.
DeleteI don't completely agree with his statement, "In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious." This may be true, but its not exactly true that only in cold climates we see advancements in society. A example would be the middle east where, even if not as advanced as European or North American ones, cities, governments and industries form.
DeleteThe theory that I find most interesting is the third one. I find this one interesting because it makes sense that if a group of people figures out how to irrigate crops they would be able to discover other technologies. If they have water and irrigated fields the people would likely have a larger food supply leading to a larger population which would require a government to maintain order.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that I find most interesting is the loss of languages. One example of this is: “...there are impending linguistic reverberations - especially the impending disappearance of most of the modern world’s 6,000 surviving languages, becoming replaced by English, Chinese, Russian, and a few other languages….” I am interested in the loss of languages because I have been studying a foreign language for the past 7 years of my life.
Well I also find the third topic of Geographical location to water somewhat interesting I have to disagree with you. As shown by the theory review it states "But studies have shown that early civilizations developed irrigation systems after they’d already developed centralized bureaucracies." The theory review I agree with, but I disagree with the amount of evidence for the theory because I don't think it has the strongest evidence out of all four of the theories.
DeleteI agree with you on a few points for the theory, easy access to water seems to be a key point in the development of advanced societies, although advanced irrigation is likely not an early determinate.
DeleteI agree with you that if more groups of people would think how to irrigate crops they can find new technology and more for the future. I also agree with you that getting to know more than one language is really interesting to know and find out new information you didn't know.
DeleteThe most interesting theory that I found was the Climate theory. I found the climate theory more interesting because of the use of evidence he uses to emphasize his point. This theory is found on page 1 on excerpt 3, where the author shows his point as, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing.” This evidence prove this theory because people in colder climates would have to find more advancement to survive then the people who live in warmer climates would not have to find a advancement to survive because their climate is not as threatening to them.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that I found most interesting is the living in the stone age, because it seems like something interesting to find more about their culture, and what its like there?, What kind of people live there?, Why societies did not develop? This topic come from Except 1 on page 1, where the authors states, Two centuries ago, all New Guineans were still “living in the Stone Age.”
I agree that the climate theory is really interesting because of the way he says it in the excerpt but I think it would be interesting to learn more about it and what people do about it when they live in certain areas with different climates.
DeleteI agree with you because it's interesting that in order to survive in colder climates you become more advanced because you have to figure out how to survive in the harsh conditions. Even though he makes a good argument for why people in colder climates are more advanced then people in warm climates I think that they both make people become more advanced. In cold climates you have the harsh winds, snow, ice etc but in hot climates you have to worry about overheating, dehydration etc. So, even though his evidence is good for what he believes I think that the evidence could work both ways.
DeleteI too think that the climate theory is the most interesting, simply because I never considered climate as a factor in how societies evolve. In fact, as I think about it, there are other ways that climate would impact. For example, hunter and gatherers would find little food in cold winter climates, and need to travel for food and begin to trade with others. They would also need ways to haul what they trade. So, while people near the equator would have food available all year, people in cold climates would be forced to become innovative.
DeleteThe theory that I find the most interesting is the guns, germs and steel theory because as Jared says in the text, “Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests.” Older European topics (such as the Renaissance) are quite interesting to me. So if he is saying that these reasons are responsible for their success in their conquests, that’s something I’d like to look into.
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree to disagree, this is because with that quote he doesn't really provide much explanation. I get the idea that what the Europeans wanted is what happened from that, and that just seems to broad yet placebo to be real.
DeleteThe climate theory was the most interesting to me because it seems somewhat reasonable as an explanation. The theory stated that, "Perhaps the seasonally variable climate at high latitudes poses more diverse challenges than does a seasonally constant tropical climate. Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing." This would be reasonable because the requirements to survive in colder climates would be higher and need more advanced technology developed in order to survive.
ReplyDeleteAs an emerging topic, I found life during and shortly after the ice age. I found this in excerpt 1, page 2, when it said "Until the end of the last Ice Age, around 11,000 B.C., all peoples on all continents were still hunter-gatherers." I'm curious as to what life was like back then.
I agree with your statement because I noticed about the climate theory that survival in colder climates would be higher and nice emerging topic.
DeleteI'd have to disagree with you that this is the sole factor in development of a civilization. Look at Rome they didnt have germs or guns but they had steel, and were in a mediteranean climate, and they took over almost all of the more developed world
DeleteThe most interesting theory to me is the Climate theory. I find this interesting because of what the theory is. The theory is that “In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious”. To me I see where the theory is coming from but yet I don't fully agree with it. I feel as it's also hard to survive in warmer/hot climates. And that living in warmer climates can be difficult and doesn't mean that you are less advanced. People living in warmer climates might have harder times growing food if it doesn't rain. Warmer climates also sometimes have to prepare ahead for tsunamis and hurricanes. And could have less resources as well depending on where they are. They are just as many challenges in warmer climates as cold climates.
ReplyDeleteThe topic im interested in from the emerging topics is the Stone Age. In excerpt 2 he states “, modern “Stone Age” peoples are on the average probably more intelligent, not less intelligent, than industrialized peoples”. With what he said made me interested because I have never heard of the Stone Age and I want to learn more about it and understand more about what he is saying.
I would have to agree with you, I believe that both climates have there challenges. In this quote it states “In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious." This connects to are claim because its telling us how the cold climate affects people but it also goes the other way around. In the hot climate you also have to stay cool and out from the sun or else you can die. Yes the challenges might be opposite of each other but that doesn't mean ones smarter than the other.
DeleteI see this as a factor but not the whole thing, look at egypt and the pyramids, they had thrived there for thousands of years, while they may not have had guns, germs, or steel. they were oneof the most highly developed civilizations of that time.
DeleteClimate theory is the most striking to me mostly because of the ironic factor. Those who claim that people in colder climates do so well is immediately shot down by Diamond pointing out, "the peoples of northern Europe contributed nothing of fundamental importance to Eurasian civilization until the last thousand years”! The sheer, straight up debunk is amazing to me and it really stuck to me that way. The debunk also made a lot of sense; how Diamond broke it down was extremely concise to the point where I could imagine the author was pointing to the evidence making a face that says, “seriously?”.
ReplyDeleteAs for my emerging topic, I was completely floored by the idea of ‘pure innate intelligence’. Diamond even states, “tests of cognitive ability (like IQ tests) tend to measure cultural learning and not pure innate intelligence, whatever that is.” Even Diamond doesn’t know what it is, and he /studied/ all of this! I want to dive into it and see what all of the mystery is about.
The emerging topic sounds really impressive that it would totally want me to learn about it if I had the time to do the research but I cant because I get really busy and I also agree that the climate theory interesting even if Diamond did debunk it it still sounds like some thing that I want to know more about.
DeleteI'm glad you agree! Pure innate intelligence is apparently something that can't be measured...I'll consider trying to come up with a theory on how to correctly measure it, or how to measure it as close to accurate as possible. My initial thoughts of measuring intelligence would be a combination of different tests to consider multiple /types/ of intelligence. Or if theories are already made, or if 'pure smarts measurement' is clearly unachievable, there's always speculation. We shall see!
DeleteI agree I think the climate theory was a little far fetched. I think me personal I think I'm more lazy in the winter than in the summer. In the winter I think it would be harder to survive in the winter because there are so many more advance that need to be made.
DeleteI do agree with what you have said. Why I do agree is because when looking at the climate theory it is definitely the most interesting one out of the bunch. Even with how the idea of the people that are in “colder” climates are more inventive when in reality the people from much warmer climates have created inventive things.
DeleteI found the Biology & Genetics to be the most interesting theory. I found this the most interesting because to me it seems highly unlikely. An example from the second except that supports this is, “Europeans became considered genetically more intelligent than Africans, and especially more so than Aboriginal Australians.” This quote is saying that people think that Europeans were born smarter. Which to me seems highly likely for someone to bron ‘smart.’ A topic that picked out from the excerpts that I liked the most was the stone age. I was interested in this topic because I have a lot of unknowns about the stone age. For example, what is considered the stone age? and what was life like than?
ReplyDeleteHow are some civilizations the cause of guns? I'm just curious.
DeleteThe biology theory is also very interesting to me. However I disagree that your genetics does not affect how smart you are. Studies show, how smart you are can be influenced by both your genetics and the environment you are raised up in.
Deleteeven though the biology was interesting i have to disagree with what you have said because I do not believe genetics plays into your intelligence, even though it may seem like it.
DeleteI agree with you. We can inherit specific traits, for example, a parent could be a quick learner. Let's say the parent has always been a quick learner, when that parent has a child, the child can also pick things up pretty quickly. That doesn't mean that our genetics are the only thing factoring into making us smart.
DeleteOne theory by Jared Diamond that interested me the most would be theory #2: The impact of climate. The reason why I think of this theory to be interesting is due to the fact of invaders that took over different areas of the world never went too far in arctic areas, such as how it was shown in Excerpt 3 of "Guns, Germs, and Steel" on Page 1: " Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing. Or the argument can be reversed to reach the same conclusion: the long winters at high latitudes leave people with much time in which to sit indoors and invent."
ReplyDeleteHow this topic speaks out to me is the way it talks about a mixture of habitat, and survival, where a human makes the decision of staying on land that is considered safe or dangerous, and has to battle the odds of death, and surroundings.
One of the theory's i’m most interested in is the impact of climate because people were only able to advance their skills by surviving in really cold weather. This was automatically shot down by Diamond by him saying, “the peoples of northern Europe contributed nothing of fundamental importance to Eurasian civilization until the last thousand years!”. I found this intriguing because it was a hard debunk but it was true.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that interested me was from excerpt 2 with the quote saying “Second, tests of cognitive ability (like IQ tests) tend to measure cultural learning and not pure innate intelligence, whatever that is.” This is talking about the Defining pure innate intelligence, which was interesting to me and left me question Is there industrial tech involved with the culture?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDo you think that this is the only reason European conquests were successful? Also do you think that if other nations or tribes had developed guns and steel tools and had an immunity to certain diseases before the Europeans would have conquered as much as the Europeans or even want to conquer other places? The author claims that guns, steel and germs are the main reason Europeans were successful in their conquests which I do not completely disagree with but there had to be more than those reasons that they were successful like they had to have had a good strategy and a lot of soldiers also.
DeleteI find the climate theory the most interesting because the author had good points. On page 1 from excerpt 3 of Guns, Germs, and Steel the author states “The long winters at high latitudes leave people much time in which to sit indoors and invent” meaning that the civilians who lived in the colder climate had nothing else to really do besides advance their skills with inventions to help them survive.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that I am currently most interested in is the Aztecs and the Incas, on page 2 in excerpt 1 the author says “ two Native American peoples, the Aztecs and the Incas, ruled over empires with stone tools” this topic interests me because I would like to learn more about how they ruled empires because of their stone tools.
DeleteI agree with you, choosing to live in a climate like that they really had no other option, than to build and become more advanced as a society.
I would have to disagree with you because in hot weather you do not want to be outside either. You can get dehydrated and drained from the heat. So I believe that both climates will make you invent stuff just for the opposite reasons.
DeleteI see where your point of view is coming from and thinking how people who live in colder climates would be more advances because they have "nothing" to do and advances themselves. I disagree with that because studies are shown that people who live in the winter are more depressed and suicidal because the days are "shorter" and not a lot of sunlight. Seasonal Affective Disorder occurs more winter happens because of the no sunlight and the long winters. When its cold outside and below 0 , me personally I wouldn't wanna go outside at all. Being inside all days has me in bed watching Netflix and sleeping. I don't have any motivation at all because half the days in the winter are cold and gloomy. So I wouldn't have really any motivation to be coming up with ideas to make things to survive in the winter. In my opinion I think people in the summer face just as many challenge and if not they have more motivation to be more advanced. Being in the sun is shown that you're more happier and healthier which will lead to more motivation to create things to help the survive. But both climates both have their difficulties and their own advances skills that work for their own environments.
DeleteThe theory I found the most interesting was the climate theory. I felt like it had the most evidence to answer the question, "Perhaps the seasonally variable climate at high latitudes poses more diverse challenges than does a seasonally constant tropical climate. Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing." (Excerpt 3, page 1). This shows that people that live in colder climates need to plan out what they are going to do and they need more "cargo" than people that live in warmer climate to survive.
ReplyDeleteI agree with how you said the climate theory is the most interesting because I also feel that it has the strongest evidence. I feel it has the strongest evidence because people that live in a cold winter climate such as Wisconsin need more to survive and stay warm. I also agree with the evidence you used because it helps show that it has a valid argument."Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing."
DeleteI agree with your whole statement that the climate changes how people react to surviving. The cold weather causes people to react and need to evolve to survive. They have to build warmer homes and have heat. The warmer places don't need this because they already have heat all year around so they can be more relaxed so they never have as much technology as other areas in the world.
DeleteI'm very surprised so many people were similar minded and chose this very controversial topic. I will however have to disagree with you because in my opinion it just explains possibilities on what these climate populations achieved and their growth rather than simply telling us which climate invented more or which had the most complex/knowledgeable communities. This was a very interesting topic which i agree on but I believe it did not help us figure out Yali's question one bit.
DeleteI disagree with this, as jackets and warm clothing is very simple to make, and if a society has a cold climate, but can't adapt to it, then they shouldn't be a society anymore.
DeleteI disagree with your topic on climate while i think it probably effected the end result to some extent i think that the reasoning behind this claim is quite unrealistic. The cold climate did require people to adapt to the climate but no matter where you live there is some sort of adapting involved so you cant really say that was exclusive to the cold climates of the world.
DeleteI agree with you, I think climate was the big piece of what was going on and effecting how they were living depending on the weather.
DeleteI found the theory on climate the most interesting. excerpt 2 says “In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious”. I don't really agree with this claim because history has shown otherwise. For example in early history civilizations that were located in tropical climates were far more developed and sophisticated than people in colder climates such as the american Indians. American Indians lived in tee-pees in a colder climate than most in the world where as the Aztecs and Incans were located in much warmer climates and built intricate cities with government and civilization. I find this topic interesting because there are so many different opinions on how certain parts of the world developed their infrastructure and i'd like to develop my own idea on how I think it happened.
ReplyDeleteI agree, climates are the start, people need their bodies to be as close to their personal idea of comfort. If they can't have that, they become very limited with their opportunities.
DeleteI agree that the most interesting theory has to do with climate. I am still have mixed opinions on this topic and was really influenced to believe your thoughts when you mentioned that history has shown otherwise. do you think if you could go in depth about what history adds to your claim that would make your claim EVEN STRONGER?
DeleteAs for my emerging topic i found the idea of the average IQs of the people in the world the most interesting. I am intrigued with this because i'm curios to see how where people are living in the world corresponds with the level IQ of their people.
DeleteI’ll have to say that I agreed with the idea of climate and biological differences. People’s bodies have had to adapt over time to their specific climates, and in excerpt 3 page 1, he talks about how people in different climates have had to change their lifestyle to adapt to that. It is no question that people make different choices based upon the given opportunity, and in places where they had an easier living they were given more opportunities to advance. In excerpt 2, he states, “First, even our cognitive abilities as adults are heavily influenced by the social environment that we experienced during childhood”, with this being said, with a harder lifestyle from the beginning of life, maybe that’s all they’ve grown accustomed to be and do.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you about the climate theory. It is true that people have to adapt to the environment. When it someone from Florida go to Wisconsin they think that our weather is very cold in winters. They are not used to our cold winters.
DeleteThe theory that is the most interesting to me is the development of guns, germs, and steel. I think that the reason that Europeans were able to conquer the other civilizations is because they do not have guns. They don't have the medicine or the same tools that the Europeans have and it made it more difficult for them to defend themselves. A piece of evidence that I found is in page 2 of the 3rd excerpt when he says that Yet another type of explanation lists the immediate factors that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other peoples—especially European guns, infectious diseases, steel tools, and manufactured products. Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that I am most interested in investigating is on the 2nd page of the 3rd excerpt, guns, germs and steel. This topic is the most interesting to me because it is one of the main reasons that some civilizations have more power than other civilizations.
I agree with Europeans having guns led to them conquer other civilizations, as the other people simply couldn't defend against guns.
DeleteI disagree that the Europeans conquer of other civilization was the most interesting. The climate and biological differences were more interesting. Why do you think that war was more interesting than the climate and biological differences?
DeleteI agree, One of the most interesting theory was the development of guns, germs, and steel. Because they had more resources and were more advanced then other. That's why they could conquer other civilizations.
DeleteThe theory that I find the most compelling is the theory about civilizations developing guns, building up immunity to germs, and using steel to create monumental items. I believe this is why certain civilizations have a higher social class than others because with the development of guns, the leaders had a powerful weapon to control people and protect them as well. With the immunity to certain disease, other countries and civilizations could be killed off with infections such as smallpox and those with the immunity would rise to power. Finally, the use of steel could be used in everyday items, such as buildings, tools, boats, and much more. This would strengthen those items which would make them last longer than the wooden and stone items people had used previously. A piece of evidence from the reading to support this comes from Excerpt 3. Author Jared Diamond states, “Yet another type of explanation lists the immediate factors that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other peoples—especially European guns, infectious diseases, steel tools, and manufactured products. Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests.”
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic I am most interested in is the average IQs in certain parts of the world. The reason I am interested in this topic is because It would be interesting to see the shift in the average IQs and how the different schooling affects the residents of certain countries. This topic is found in excerpt 2, page 3. Diamond states, “An enormous effort by cognitive psychologists has gone into the search for differences in IQ between peoples of different geographic origins now living in the same country. “
The climate theory is the most interesting to me. This was interesting to me because I never really thought about the weather affecting how productive we are. In excerpt 3, it states “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing.” This would prove his theory because, I find myself more cautious and planning ahead in winter, what I need to wear and how long I need to warm my car up. While in summer I’m more free going.
ReplyDeleteMy emerging topic that I’m most interested in the debate between nature vs nurture. This topic can be found in expert 2, when it states, “First, even our cognitive abilities as adults are heavily influenced by the social environment that we experienced during childhood, making it hard to discern any influence of preexisting genetic differences” I find this interesting because I really enjoy learning about psychology topics and learning about affects a person growing up.
I also think the climate is an interesting theory, but I think whether it is warm or cold outside people can still be protective. For example, people in colder climates like you said have to work more to be able to stay warm, but in the warmer climates they also have to more work to make sure they don't over heat.
DeleteI used the same quote as you but I don't fully agree with your reasoning. If you look back at history it was proven that people in warmer climates have had more technological advances, and more intricate designed cities than people who lived in colder climates. I think that climate affects the way people developed and lived but i dint think it worked the way the articles portrayed it.
DeleteI agree with you as I also tend to prepare and think about winter way more than warm weather. It would make sense to think that however back during that time period where water wasn't as easily accessible the heat can be just as threatening. A quote I found was, "the oldest New World pottery comes from near the equator in tropical South America; and the New World society generally considered the most advanced in art, astronomy, and other respects was the Classic Maya society of the tropical Yucatán and Guatemala in the first millennium A.D." (Pg. 1 Excerpt 3). This is suggesting that people near the equator(warmer climate) were probably more advance than the people whom live in cold climates.
DeleteI agree with you because for both climates you need to prepare yourself ahead and make sure your wearing the appropriate clothes to make sure you are not hot or cold and that will make your body feel comfortable for the whole day.
DeleteThe theory that I find the most interesting is access to advanced capabilities because I think this is why certain areas of people got more developed then others. I believe this because if people were able to develop weapons, immunity to diseases, and proximity to metal they were thinking more advanced then all of the other regions. In excerpt 1, Diamond says, " Two centuries ago, all New Guineans were still “living in the Stone Age.” That is, they still used stone tools similar to those superseded in Europe by metal tools thousands of years ago, and they dwelt in villages not organized under any centralized political authority." This shows that there was no laws and no organized way of living and everyone helped everyone live without permission from a higher authority.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that most stood out to me was from excerpt 2 when Diamond said, "“That’s why psychologists try to understand the minds of murderers and rapists, why social historians try to understand genocide, and why physicians try to understand the causes of human disease.” This made me wonder if there is a certain thing in these people's brains that show us why they acted the way they did.
I completely agree with you on the emerging topic of excerpt 2 when it says, “That’s why psychologists try to understand the minds of murderers and rapists, why social historians try to understand genocide, and why physicians try to understand the causes of human disease.” I wonder as well how all these people such as historians try to understand genocide and what can be behind it. It's a very interesting emerging topic and hopefully we can figure it out one day so that it can give us answers.
DeleteI completely agree with your statements and evidence. I especially agree with the piece that talks about the people of New Guinea still living in the stone age. Diamond makes compelling points about how people have developed amazing inventions and have evolved as civilizations.
DeleteThe theory I find most interesting is, biology and genes. I say this because it not only makes sense to me but has very little flaws. If the genetics are bad, then you will continue passing down bad genetics and eventually natural selection takes over. One quote that stuck out to me is “Most Europeans who escaped fatal infections also escaped other potential causes of death and proceeded to pass on their genes. Today, most live-born Western infants survive fatal infections as well and reproduce themselves, regardless of their intelligence and the genes they bear. In contrast, New Guineans have been living in societies where human numbers were too low for epidemic diseases of dense populations to evolve.” and I agree with this One of the emerging topics I chose to pursue or at least look into, is power and wealth. I think along with biology and genetics power and wealth plays a major key in this question. One quote I found for this is “Why did wealth and power become distributed as they now are, rather than in some other way? For instance, why weren’t Native Americans, Africans, and Aboriginal Australians the ones who decimated, subjugated, or exterminated Europeans and Asians?”
ReplyDeleteI disagree with what evidence you used. When he wrote, "Most Europeans who escaped fatal infections also escaped other potential causes of death and proceeded to pass on their genes. Today, most live-born Western infants survive fatal infections as well and reproduce themselves, regardless of their intelligence and the genes they bear. In contrast, New Guineans have been living in societies where human numbers were too low for epidemic diseases of dense populations to evolve.” it comes from him talking about causes of death. The reasons they have different causes of death is a result of their way of lives. Europeans live in large community's that are policed, but New Guineans live in smaller communities that have limited rule.
DeleteI'm sad to say but I disagree with the supporting evidence you're providing in your comment as well as the theory but I can't say that. In genes and genetics if a race or species of animal doesn't survive long or thrive most animals with start to evolve or change it's genetic coding. Of course this process takes thousands or millions of years to influx. But rarely does a species pass down "bad" genes and not try to survive.
DeleteI dunno about that, i don't think it was the genes, but the fact that they didn't have much of anything. if it was bad genes they'd most likely be dead by now, but the survive.. just primitive.
DeleteYali’s question had many different explanations/answers, however, what I thought to be the most convincing answer was that civilizations that are immune to infectious diseases, have access to weaponry and also have a proximity to metal are the most successful civilizations. This can be used to answer Yali’s question because Europeans are immune to infectious disease and have access to weaponry and metal, showing that they are more advanced and by being more advanced they produce and invent more things which proves that Yali’s people don’t have as much things as we do. A piece of evidence to support the answer is, “Yet another type of explanation lists the immediate factors that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other peoples—especially European guns, infectious diseases, steel tools, and manufactured products”. Another piece of evidence found in the text is, “ Africa is the continent where protohumans evolved for the longest time, where anatomically modern humans may also have arisen, and where native diseases like malaria and yellow fever killed European explorers”.
ReplyDeleteThe theory I found most interesting is the climate theory. I picked this one because I never thought about weather having this much of an impact on life.The more I think about this it really does, especially living in Wisconsin. But I would have to disagree when it states “In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious”. I think yes, in cold weather you will have to try and find a warm shelter and really think about how you go outside or you can freeze. But it goes the same way with someone who lives in the desert where there is heat in the hundreds. They have to stay cool and not go outside or they can get dehydrated. In conclusion I believe there is challenges in both types of climates.
ReplyDeleteAs of right now the emerging topic that really has my interest is if what we have (electronics) compared to New Guinea is really a blessing or are we the ones missing out? This came from excerpt 2 on page 1 where it states “My own impression, from having divided my life between United States cities and New Guinea villages, is that the so-called blessings of civilization are mixed.” This is speaking to me because I would love to see what they treasure or do on a day to day compared to us where are life is consumed of electronics.
I agree with you when you disagreed with "In cold climates, it's been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious." because for both climates people need to prepare themselves and find clothing to make them feel comfortable for the cold weather but also for the hot weather. They need to find a place to not dehydrated during the summer since the temperatures gets really hot but also for people not to get frost bite on there body.
DeleteThe excerpt that speaks to me the most is that the Europeans developed guns germs and steel. the Europeans got to those things before everyone else. the Europeans had an upper hand and got to defend themselves better then everyone else due to the fact that they got to guns germs and steel faster. The Europeans also got to use the germs and viruses as a weapon. Jared diamond said "such an explanation is on the right track as those factors Demonstrably were directly responsible for the European conquests. I think that they planned on going on a conquest after they had an upper hand on people and to see what they couldve done
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThe theory I find most interesting is "access to advanced capabilities" . I think this is interesting because it would be interesting to find if the Europeans just happen to get lucky, or if they worked harder to get where they were. If the Europeans were some of the first to make guns, use steel, and become immune to some harmful diseases, they would have a handful of advantages over other communities, that will allow them to advance further, and take more land easily. From the 2nd excerpt, it says "Probably the commonest explanation involves implicitly or explicitly assuming biological differences among peoples. In the centuries after A.D. 1500, as European explorers became aware of the wide differences among the world’s peoples in technology and political organization," which shows that the Europeans were aware they were more technologically advanced, and maybe used that to their advantage.
ReplyDeleteThe topic that I am interested in is the progression difference between different cultures. I got the idea from Yali’s big question, “Why is it that you white people developed so much cargo and brought it to New Guinea, but we black people had little cargo of our own?” This topic interest me because it would be very cool to see where exactly the Europeans started to get ahead, and maybe even how they did. Finding out what was different between Europeans and the other cultures could lead to an answer.
I agree with the statements you're providing and the evidence that is supporting it. Europeans are defiantly in their position now a days due to their access to advanced ores and other materials. Also with the Topic you chose I, as well agree. It is an interesting topic to discus. And would be intrigued to see a comparison between those cultures.
DeleteI agree that the Europeans where in a strong position due to their wealth, immunity and resources. It makes sense that a civilization near a large amount of resources would be able to develop technologies and government faster than other groups with fewer resources available.
DeleteRight, they had better immune systems, they had more weaponry, and bigger population, to bring out more advancements and get more cargo to buy and sell. then the islanders had nothing to base off of.
DeleteI found the theory of climate to be the most interesting possible answer to Yali’s question. I believe this because there is contrasting researched evidence and because of this it is hard to link cold climate populations productivity/growth to the warm climate populations. One interesting fact mentioned is in excerpt 3 when Jared Diamond explains,” The sole Native American societies to develop writing arose in Mexico south of the Tropic of Cancer; the oldest New World pottery comes from near the equator in tropical South America; and the New World society generally considered the most advanced in art, astronomy, and other respects was the Classic Maya society of the tropical Yucatán and Guatemala in the first millennium A.D.” While earlier in the excerpt he was explaining that the majority thought,”the long winters at high latitudes leave people with much time in which to sit indoors and invent.” It is hard to find which point is correct ,therefore it is the most interesting and controversial to me.
ReplyDeleteI am also most interested in researching the topic of Eurocentrism. I found this topic in excerpt 2 in paragraph 2. The text says,” “Second, doesn’t addressing Yali’s question automatically involve a Eurocentric approach to history, a glorification of western Europeans, and an obsession with the prominence of western Europe and Europeanized America in the modern world?” This topic is speaking to me because it adds a possible clue to how the europeans became such a powerful example of growth over time and how they achieved so much “cargo.”
While you make an excellent point, Max, I feel I should point out that both colder and warmer climates have to deal with more than just ‘cold’ and ‘warm’. Colder climates have to deal with blizzards, the cold, and general winter. On the flip side, warmer climates have to work with what that type of climate brings, such as coasts dealing with hurricanes and mudslides. Also consider droughts, which brings the environment for dry lightning and wildfires.
DeleteCollectively between these two climates, they share earthquakes (of course, between tectonic plates there’s more quakes in those locations), tornadoes, and other natural disaster-makers. Between these two climates, there are different types of germs that survive, and access to certain resources as well (ie. desert vs pine forests). Also consider animalistic danger (ie. wolves, snakes, and bears, vs scorpions, alligators and huge as heck spiders), and plant life.
The point I’m trying to make is there’s plenty of things that must be taken into account weather-wise, because they accommodate different species of all kinds.
I find that the most interesting theory to yali’s question is that the climate impacted the development of societies. I find this interesting because in many tropical or hot areas, people go there to relax and turn off their brains. If it’s like that today then was it different hundreds of years ago? In excerpt 3, Diamond says, ”Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing.” This makes you think of all the advantages of living in a warmer climate rather than a cold. To survive in a cold climate you need a strategy to get a secure shelter and a solid source of food and water. To dismantle the theory diamond says, “the New World society generally considered the most advanced in art, astronomy, and other respects was the Classic Maya society of the tropical Yucatán and Guatemala in the first millennium A.D.” Even with this statement, the implications of the different climates show divided requirements for survival and it is a factor for development.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic i’m most interested in is early tribal societies in southeastern Australia. This was mentioned in excerpt 3 when talking about the development of irrigation systems in societies. “River valleys of the southwestern United States eventually came to support irrigation agriculture and complex societies, but only after many of the developments on which those societies rested had been imported from Mexico. The river valleys of southeastern Australia remained occupied by tribal societies without agriculture.” I’m interested in this topic because i'm unfamiliar with the history of australia and how it’s societies changed and developed compared to others.
I think the theory that I find the most interesting is biology & genetics because it’s cool to see the evolution of how things develop over time. People believed that Europeans were naturally superior to different countries especially the Aboriginal Australians and I think that’s what brings in the evolution of the Darwin theory in the 1800s. “ With the rise of Darwinian theory, explanations were recast in terms of natural selection and of evolutionary descent. Technologically primitive peoples were considered evolutionary vestiges of human descent from apelike ancestors. The displacement of such peoples by colonists from industrialized societies exemplified the survival of the fittest. With the later rise of genetics, the explanations were recast once again, in genetic terms. Europeans became considered genetically more intelligent than Africans, and especially more so than Aboriginal Australians.” This explains how genetically advanced Europeans were than Aboriginal Australians by assuming biological differences with technology and political organization.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that I’m most interested in would be the Darwin theory that’s in excerpt 2 because it talks about the biological evolution of humans and how to increase an individual’s ability to compete, survive, and reproduce over time.
The theory I found interesting is the theory about the climate. I believe that the climate theory is the most interesting because it has the strongest evidence to completely answer Yali’s question. On the first page in the third excerpt states, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. This part of the excerpt shows strong evidence that proves Yali's theory. It stated that people that resides in cooler climates have to develop more cargo to survive. In contrast, people that live in warmer climates don’t need as much cargo to survive.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that I found the most interesting it how the Ice Age changed the climate and world. The topic about the Ice Age was on the first page in the first excerpt. The author states in that excerpt, “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools.” Topic of the Ice Age interests me because I want to learn more about the Ice Age and how it changed the world.
I can definitely see why you found this theory to be the most believable, however I disagree with having the strongest evidence to prove and answer Yali's question. Jared also states that the theory was debunked. As stated here, "The peoples of northern Europe contributed nothing of fundamental importance to Eurasian civilization until the last thousand years" (Pg. 1 Excerpt 1). This is saying that people in the north (cold climate) has had no contribution to why things are the way they are. If the theory would be true, then the northern would have had an impact and perhaps be the first ones to develop and advance.
DeleteI understand the evidence that you are saying. But what makes that piece of evidence that you provided explains and clarifies the theory more?
DeleteThe theory that I found most interesting was the Darwin Theory of natural selection and evolution decent. It says “Europeans became considered genetically more intelligent than Africans, and especially more so than Aboriginal Australians.”People believed that Europeans were naturally superior to different countries I think that this theory is inaccurate because yes some people are born smarter but humans are also capable of learning. As well as being accessible to schools as well as learning from others. The emerging topic I am most interested in is disappearance of modern languages I find it interesting that languages are “disappearing” and I would like to learn more about it and why they are disappearing.
ReplyDeleteThe theory I found most interesting was the Access to advanced capabilities. I found this theory the most interesting because it makes the most sense to me. With more advanced guns, germs, and steel this allowed the Europeans to be ahead of other civilizations. This allowed them to better themselves because they had guns to hunt better and metal to further there tools and items. Jared Diamond states in excerpt 3, “that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other peoples—especially European guns, infectious diseases.” This allows the Europeans to take over other civilizations because they had disease that they were immune or cures for, weapons that were more power that allowed them more protection, and better equipment due to the metal. With stronger objects and more powerful this allows and makes the Europeans the strongest. For example, I hunt with my Family and not being able to have a gun would sure make it a lot harder and take a lot longer to kill a deer or turkey. I mean we have other foods now to live off of, but back then when that was what they relied on for food and survival it was crucial to be able to get one and having a gun only made it easier and gave them more time for other things. A possible topic for a research paper would be where Diamond stated in excerpt 2, “The hunter-gatherer lifestyle.” This is to find out about how New Guinea people in specific hunted and gathered without the technology we have and use these days.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement that if they have better access to more advanced guns, germs and steel they would be able to concur other civilizations. the civilization with the more advanced items would be easily able to concur other civilizations.
DeleteI find the idea of that the answer to Yali’s question being guns, germs and steel to be most interesting. Diamond calls these “the immediate factors that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other peoples” and these are all tools of war. During conflicts nations are forced to be become stronger and more advanced or they risk defeat. New inventions, greater economies and even alliances between nations are created which simply strengthens nations. Unless a group is forced to grow stronger, then they won’t.
ReplyDeleteCurrently the emerging topic that I found most interesting was the contrastment to the treatment of the native New Guineans by the white colonists and slavery and racism to African Americans in the United States. Diamond wrote, “Even the least able of New Guinea’s white “masters,” as they were still called in 1972, enjoyed a far higher standard of living than New Guineans, higher even than charismatic politicians like Yali.” the term ‘white masters” says it all. The Whites ruled over the native population and we viewed as the superior race.
I agree with you that the guns, germs and steel is the most interesting because without them the Europeans would not have more power over the other civilizations.
DeleteThe theory that I found the most interesting was about the climate. I found it to be the most interesting because to me it seems to be the most believable theory. The author says that people in colder climates have to work harder which lead to them building more advanced things which put them ahead of people living in warmer climates. This can be seen when the author states, “In cold climates, it’s been argued, humans have to work harder to survive; they have to build more sophisticated houses, plan ahead for the winter, and do other things that make them more industrious.” Even though this theory was shot down I still find it to be very believable due to the great points given.
ReplyDeleteA big topic that stood out to me was the ice age from excerpt 1 when it stated, “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only non literate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools. “ This topic speaks to me because I don't really know much about the ice age but I find it very interesting and I would love to figure out more about it, especially about how it placed people around the world in different locations and how it put some societies ahead of others.
I really liked how you related back to excerpt 1 with the Ice Age to relate the Cold Climate to survive of civilization through becoming smarter and being able to survive. For example, now a days we can just go inside or turn the heat up when we get cold but people back in the days had to build shelters warm enough to stop them from dying from hypothermia. They also had to make cloths or build fires to keep warm unlike us using heaters in our houses, this is how far we have grown and what made them very good at surviving back then. You have changed my opinion and I think this might have made them just as strong as people who already had the material available to them which gave them power.
DeleteIn my opinion, the idea that Europeans had guns, germs and steel before anyone else is the theory I find the most interesting. This is because it gives them the best possible chance to conquer and settle other lands, therefore continuing their bloodlines and prolonging their existence. “Probably the commonest explanation involves implicitly or explicitly assuming biological differences among peoples. In the centuries after A.D. 1500, as European explorers became aware of the wide differences among the world’s peoples in technology and political organization, they assumed that those differences arose from differences in innate ability.” (Excerpt 2)
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic I am the most interested in is whether or not this question already has an answer, and if so, do we know it? “DOES YALI’S QUESTION really need another book to answer it? Don’t we already know the answer? If so, what is it?” This topic is speaking to me, as it makes sense as why it’s being asked, as the answer has been in front of us the entire time, we just need to figure it out.
The climate theory was the most interesting page 1 from excerpt 3 of Guns, Germs, and Steel the author states “The long winters at high latitudes leave people much time in which to sit indoors and invent” They are just saying that people who live in a colder environment have more time to sit inside and invent new things to make their lives easier.
ReplyDeleteI think the ice age topic is most interesting because it sticks out the most and is the most unknown from the rest. “13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools.” It is most interesting because it would be cool to know how they lived.
I think the Access to advanced capabilities theory was the most interesting and the most misleading due to the idea of how this theory relates to truly answering Yali’s question. While the theory states some really good and obvious points like having weapons and immunity to diseases increase the chance for survival and productivity, it still does not even come close to fully answering why these civilizations were the first to come up with such the idea of weaponry or how they became immune to such diseases to allow them to develop and advance. By saying this theory answers Yali’s question would be farfetched in my opinion. As Jared has asked in excerpt 1, “Empires with steel weapons were able to conquer or exterminate tribes with weapons of stone and wood; How, though, did the world get to be the way it was in A.D. 1500?” (Pg. 2). Jared answers this question with ease but to really get at the origin of Yali’s question, would require to know how/why the europeans first came up with the idea of weaponry and started to advance in technology. This would eventually lead to the answer of Yali’s question, however that would be beyond our doing and in my opinion almost impossible. Another reason I was most interested in this theory was because this is a bit different from the rest of the theories. 3 of the theories has stated a origin where the problem actually started except for Guns, Germs, and Steel. This theory is missing the true beginning.
ReplyDeleteAn emerging topic I was interested in was Who’s more Inventive? As stated, “Perhaps the seasonally variable climate at high latitudes poses more diverse challenges than does a seasonally constant tropical climate” (Pg. 1 Excerpt 3). This stuck my attention because I’ve never really thought about that when thinking about human evolution.
I agree with you when you said "“Perhaps the seasonally variable climate at high latitudes poses more diverse challenges than does a seasonally constant tropical climate” (Pg. 1 Excerpt 3). This stuck my attention because I’ve never really thought about that when thinking about human evolution. " when I would think of human evolution It wouldn't have anything to do with the climate around them.
DeleteThe theory I found most interesting is geographical location to water. I found it the most interesting because colonies would not be able to grow or thrive without water. “where highly productive agriculture depended on large-scale irrigation systems that in turn required centralized bureaucracies.” If they can become highly productive in agriculture and have centralized bureaucracies they are pretty much set. The large-scale irrigation systems made this the most interesting to me because if they are near the river you would think they would be using it to hunt,fish, bathe etc. But the fact that they thought to have a irrigation system amazes me. “The Nile Valley remained a cultural backwater for about 3,000 years after village food production began to flourish in the hills of the Fertile Crescent. River valleys of the southwestern United States eventually came to support irrigation agriculture.” Once colonies began to flourish they took the ideas from the colonies that are near the water.
ReplyDeleteThe Emerging topic I am most interested in is the ice age. In excerpt 1 paragraph 1 the author says “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools.” I am very interested in the impact of what the ice age did to the world.
Theories about access to water and irrigation systems is very interesting. However, Jared Diamond argues on page “...political centralization arose for some other reason and then permitted construction of complex irrigation systems.”(Excerpt 3, pg 1) So, while water and irrigation allowed civilizations to grow, it developed while the civilization was already growing. Civilization didn’t grow because of irrigation.
DeleteThe theory that’s I believe is the most interesting to me is idea that Europeans developed guns, germs, and steel before everyone else. This puts them many years in advancement before everyone else they then have access to a higher government payout being able to take land as we saw they did back in the time of their reign. “Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests.” This quote shows that the fact they had more knowledge of weapons, metals, and sanitation it excelled to help them seize the land they did. It also gave them an easy defense if they ran into any circumstances where defense would have been needed.
ReplyDeleteMy emerging topic is the ice age is the most intriguing. "13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools.” This really shows how little we know about the ice age it was so long ago that no one really recalls it.
I agree, Both the ice age and stone age, are interesting parts of time that I would like to learn about too.
DeleteThe theory I found most interesting is the Climate Theory. The reason why I found it the most interesting because it is well described and it made the most sense to me and wanted me to write about it. When Jared Diamond explained the theory first by explaining the cold on the first body paragraph on the third page of Excerpt 1, he said “ Perhaps the seasonally variable climate at high latitudes poses more diverse challenges than does a seasonally constant tropical climate. Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. I chose to take this part out because it proves his theory, people that live in colder and cooler climates would have to adapt and be more advanced because by being in a warmer climate you would have more time and less threatening conditions to take place in activities. The emerging topic I am most interested in is when he talks about the stone age. Im interested in how mammoths and how caveman have lived in that period of time.
ReplyDeleteThe theory I find the most interesting is the river theory from excerpt 3, page 1. I find this theory to be the most believable because alongside rivers is where you can find the first civilization like the Mesopotamians alongside the Euphrates and Tigris river. The reasons they started by a river was for the abundance of the two of the three necessities for survival, food and water, all they had left was to make a roof over there head for a shelter. The water also allowed them to grow their own crops to ensure their survival. “Water control systems also appear to have been associated with centralized political organization in some other areas of the world, including the Indus Valley of the Indian subcontinent, the Yellow and Yangtze Valleys of China, the Maya lowlands of Mesoamerica, and the coastal desert of Peru.” this quote shows that when and where ever there were irrigation systems there was also some politics associated with it, which in itself shows development of the human race.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI like the point you gave about the climate being cold because it forces a civilization to be able to adapt and survive in harder conditions which makes them stronger. I think that it doesn’t make them the strongest civilization because it doesn’t give them power like guns, germs, and steel does. With these items it's not only easier to survive but easier to live and protect yourself from others. For Example, in really warm climates you need to make sure you have enough water to stay hydrated, enough shade to stay cool and not overheated, and find some kind of way to cool off the people within the civilization.
DeleteI think that the best possible answer to Yali’s question is the climate theory. This is the most interesting to be because the weather I find intriguing and how do the meteorologists predict the weather each and every day. One piece of evidence that supports this is “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, where as one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. This supports the theory because its saying that cold weather requires a lot of technology to fix the weather and cool the temperatures down for people to live in.
ReplyDeleteThe topic that I am most interested in researching at this time is Why did Native populations not win. I got this idea from the text when it said Thus, questions about inequality in the modern world can be reformulated as follows. Why did wealth and power become distributed as they now are, rather than in some other way? For instance, why weren’t Native Americans, Africans, and Aboriginal Australians the ones who decimated, subjugated, or exterminated Europeans and Asians?“. This seems like an interesting topic for me to research because I want to find out why did native Americans did not live more and not survive more longer than the Americans/Europeans.
I also thought that the best theory to answer Yali's question was the climate theory. Now that I think about this more, I can actually relate to what the author was trying to say because I actually tend to start worrying about what to wear in the winter to keep me warm than in the summer where I can wear anything. People get adapted to the weather they live in and find their ways to survive, which is very interesting to me because the weather/climate is different in every part the world and they all handle it differently.
DeleteI think that the best possible answer to Yali’s question is climate. This is the most interesting to me because the author had some good points where he talks about how some people can actually handle the cold weather or any kind of climate that they are living at. One piece of evidence that supports this is “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing. ” This supports the theory because the white people in Yali’s question live in different conditions than the New Guineans. This could be a reason why the white people would have more “cargo”. This would be great topic to research further on because different people travel and visit different states and they experience something new. For example some people could be living differently which it could cause them to invent things for their climate. This conflicts with the quote “invokes the supposed stimulatory effects of their homeland’s cold climate and the inhibitory effects of hot, humid, tropical climates on human creativity and energy.” so I want to see more about if this idea has any truth to it.
ReplyDeleteThe climate theory is the most interesting to me because of the evidence that backs it up. Diamond says, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing.” This makes sense to me because the people in cold climates would have to be more innovative and do the correct things in order to survive whereas the people in warm climates don't have to do as much due to their climate being so easy to live in. Additionally, climate would affect resources. People in a colder climate would be driven to travel for resources and learn to trade with other people. This probably require them to find ways to travel with tools, and haul what they traded. Hunters and gatherers in cold climates would have a hard time in winter finding food, and would learn ways to preserve foods. All these necessities would lead to advancing their technology.
ReplyDeleteThough I find climate very interesting, I think that the emerging topic of the domestication of plants is also interesting. What do they mean by “plant domestication,” and how did that help societies evolve? What types of plants were first domesticated? Was it accidental or intentional?
I too wonder what plant domestication means.
DeleteAll of the theories that were discussed in the excerpt were very interesting to me, but the theory that caught my attention the most was the climate theory that was mentioned in excerpt 3. The reason it caught my attention the most was because it got me thinking a different way. I didn’t really think about how the weather could actually affect how productive people are and how the weather could impact people's life. One quote from the excerpt that I thought was a strong evidence to prove this theory was “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing.” I found this quote to be a strong evidence to prove the theory because it says that people that live in more cooler places have to be more advance to survive and people living in the warmer places don't really need to.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic I am the most interested in was the Ice age because I don’t know much about it and would like to learn more and to further understand it. I want to know how it affected the world and how everything changed. This topic was discussed in excerpt 1 of Guns, Germs, and Steel. When it said “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only non literate farming societies”
I agree with that climate change affects how productive people are and how it impacts our life. For example, in the summer when it's nice out we are outside, but if we are out there for so long we do want to do anything later.
DeleteThe most interesting thing is the climate theory. I find it the most interesting because I feel like it has the best evidence to answer Yali’s question. On page 1 of excerpt 3 the author states that, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. This shows strong evidence to prove his theory because it says that people that live in better climates have to make more “cargo” to survive. While people that live in the warmer climates don’t need as much “cargo” to survive.
ReplyDeleteThe topic that I found the most interesting was how has the ice age changed the world. This topic of the ice age came from page 1 of except 1 and the author states, “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only nonliterate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools.” This topic of the ice age is interesting because I want to find how the Ice age changed the world, and what caused the ice age.
I agree with you bro and I even have the same piece of evidence too because I feel that if you are in a place that is cold you need somewhere to live and cloths for you to be able to survive in the cold weather.
DeleteI agree that the climate was the most interesting theory. Because the people that lived in the cold had more resources and they were more advanced then people in a warm climate.
DeleteI agree with you because people in colder climates need more resources and more technology to survive
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe theory that I found most interesting was the differences between climates. In a colder climate you need more resources to survive and a warm place to live. In a warm climate you don’t need as much resources as a cold climate but you can do more things. This theory is interesting because the Europeans developed guns, germs and steel before everyone else and they lived in a cold climate. My thoughts were that in a warm climate you could do more and get more advanced than other places. But that wasn’t the case and that’s why this is interesting to me.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that I’m most interested in is the stone age it sounds like a good topic to look more in to. This topic came from excerpt 1. Looking at how the people lived and what they eat to live. What they did to have fun and what happened to them. All of these question are why I’m interested in this topic.
I agree with you bro because the weather is something that I think is the most interesting topic because in some places the weather is too cold or to hot that people are not able to do anything, and that's why some of the people have more then others.
DeleteI think that the best possible answer to Yali’s question is climate . This is the most interesting to be because in some cases people have more because in some places the weather is more hotter than other places and others is too cold to do things or even go outside. One piece of evidence that supports this is “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. This supports the theory because it tries to explain that if you live on a bad weather temperature you need to be smart to get to the things you need.
ReplyDeleteThe topic that I am most interested in researching at this time is Native Americans. I got this idea from the text when it said “For instance, why weren’t Native Americans, Africans, and Aboriginal Australians the ones who decimated, subjugated, or exterminated Europeans and Asians?”. This seems like an interesting topic for me to research because I wanna know more about Native Americans and how they get their things.
I agree with you i think that climate really does affect a society because depending on the climate people have to work harder than others to survive
DeleteOut of all the theories that were in mind I believe the one that stood out to me was the climate, and how it impacts a single person or a society. Because I never really thought the weather made a big impact on how someone does things to survive, but as I processed things it made sense to realize that Weather does play a big factor on how you do things so that you can survive. An example from our Excerpts, as this piece of evidence provides strong evidence, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, where as one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing.” This was a sharp piece of evidence that Jared Diamond said and made me process thing much clearer.
ReplyDeleteOne topic I choose from the nine I had was the stone age. I have wondered what he was trying to refer to with stone age.Such as this piece of evidence that show, Two centuries ago, all New Guineans were still “living in the Stone Age.” That is, they still used stone tools similar to those superseded in Europe by metal tools thousands of years ago, and they dwelt in villages not organized under any centralized political authority. When I think of stone age I think of dinosaurs and such other stuff. As Jared Diamond brought it up, I had a interest in learning more about the stone age, and how it relates to the New Guineans.
The climate change theory stood out the most for me I agree with the author when he said on page 1 excerpt 3 “cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive” the reason that I agree with him is because when its cold or winter people back in the day they had to worry about keeping warm so they had to make a fire and during the summer when it's hot all they really had to worry about finding shade. This shows that people in warmer climate don't really have to worry as much as people who live in a colder climate
ReplyDeleteOne emerging topic I found interesting is the ice age because I really don't know nothing about it and I want to learn how people during that time survived and what impact did the ice age do to the earth.
( I forgot to include my quote for my emerging topic) “In the 13,000 years since the end of the last Ice Age, some parts of the world developed literate industrial societies with metal tools, other parts developed only non literate farming societies, and still others retained societies of hunter-gatherers with stone tools.” here the author is saying that after the ice age it helped develop literate industrial societies.
DeleteI agree with you man, I also find the ice age vey interesting topic to research!
DeleteI agree with what you're stating, because like us in Wisconsin we have to use more clothing for the winter in order to survive such as Winter coats, Scarf, Boots, and Winter Gloves during the winter where as in Florida you only need a casual shirt, shorts, and shoes, and sandals to survive in Florida. So yeah I can see why in colder places we need those kinds of things to survive.
DeleteThe most interesting theory to me is that other civilizations had more access to advanced capabilities. This theory is the most interesting to me because it makes the most sense to me. I think it makes the most sense because the civilizations that had access to metals were able to further improve their tools and housing which helped them survive. Having access to metals also allowed civilizations to further advance their technology which eventually lead to the invention of cars and electricity that made living a lot easier, this also gave people more time to focus on educating themselves on more then just how to survive which in return lead to even more advances in technology. “Yet another type of explanation lists the immediate factors that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other peoples—especially European guns, infectious diseases, steel tools, and manufactured products. Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests” In this quote he is saying that since the Europeans had guns and steel tools they were easily able to conquer their enemies which helped them survive.
ReplyDeleteThe emerging topic that i'm most interested in researching is, “why did human development proceed at such different rates on different continents?” This topic makes me really curious on why people all over the world developed differently when everyone has the same ability the learn.
The theory that I was most interested in was the idea that the Europeans developed guns, germs, and steel before everyone else. This would give the Europeans a huge advantage in many fields against other people in the time frame, it gives them a jump in front of the starting line. It allows them to defend themselves against others if need be. Which also helped them with being able to develop faster if they were to win and not lose everything. According to Jared Diamond,”Yet another type of explanation lists the immediate factors that enabled Europeans to kill or conquer other people especially European guns, infectious diseases, steel tools, and manufactured products. Such an explanation is on the right track, as those factors demonstrably were directly responsible for European conquests.” Yet the author goes on to say that this hypothesis is incorrect, because the simple question of why were the Europeans the ones to develop guns, the nastiest germs, and steel.
ReplyDeleteA topic that was very intriguing to me was the European Expansion in Excerpt 1. It was interesting to me because why do they seem to be the first ones to do many things. In the quote, “As of the year A.D. 1500, when Europe’s worldwide colonial expansion was just beginning, peoples on different continents already differed greatly in technology and political organization.” Europeans were always a step ahead it seemed like, and that interest me because why do they seem to have such more opportunities than others. That would be a good research topic it seems.
You say that they would have the advantage if they needed to defend themselves but don't you think that the people from New Guinea would have a fair fight since they know the land and how to use it to their advantage?
Deleteyour mom doesn't love you, p.s i'm dating your sister now
DeleteThe theory that I found most interesting is the Climate change. Why I found climate change the most interesting is because when looking at all the climates around the world and how they have adapted to the climates I think it makes sense for having the much more inventive people in the “cooler” climates as they are stuck inside and lead to find different activities to keep them occupied whereas in “warmer” climates some people want to be more lazy and will not want to to more inventive things.
ReplyDeleteA emerging topic that I found and figured that was most interesting is historical inequalities which is mentioned in the first excerpt, on the first page. Why I find this one interesting is because I would like to learn more about history and its inequalities.
I agree that the historical inequalities is interesting because we don't really know what actually way back when you never know whats true and what's not true that is in our history books.
DeleteThe theory that I found more interesting was the climate one, a piece of evidence that i found was on page 1, excerpt 3, “Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in the tropics with simpler housing and no clothing”. I find this very interesting because this could be a part of the answer to Yali's question, because people in warmer climates or at least well balanced climates don't have to worry much about warm shelter and stuff like that... so they have a better advantage of growing and developing better that those who live in colder climate.
ReplyDeleteAn emerging topic i wanna research is the Ice age because I really dont know alot about it and well i wanna know if its the same as the movie.
I believe that climate had the largest effect on how the area is colonized. As stated on excerpt one page 2 “He and I both knew perfectly well that New Guineans are on the average at least as smart as Europeans.” From that we know that it is not because of their intelligence but because of something that no one can control. Each part of the world have a different climate that can super cold or overly hot and sometimes both in the same year. Because of our dramatic temperature changes we needed to adapt by building houses with heat and AC. Over time people with more money wanted to almost show it off by having bigger and better. While in New Guinea they have warm temperatures year long and along with that they know how to live completely off the land. But by living off the land resources run out quick and the colony would need to search further for the essentials so it would just be easier to move everything to where the resources are. With adapting to the land it would be hard to bring along a house and all the “cargo” that you own.
ReplyDeleteIn excerpt 1 He stated that “He and I both knew perfectly well that New Guineans are on the average at least as smart as Europeans.” my question that came to my mind is that if they are not as “advanced” as people with a lot of cargo how did they continue to keep up with our educational standards.
I Think the most interesting topic is The europeans advancing in metal and guns faster. 'Much of Europe, Asia, and North Africa was the site of metal-equipped states or empires, some of them on the threshold of industrialization'. The fact that they had the first advances speak greatly on what was going on around where the europeans were. definitely a lot more people and resources. The reason i find this topic the most interesting is because New Guinea island, with less man power and less of a community, they cant really learn from others.
ReplyDeleteThe theory I found most interesting is the climate theory. people that live in cold climates would have to be more creative and do more things to survive unlike the people in warmer climates don't have to do much because their climate is a lot more easy to live in. climate would also affect human resources. People in a colder climate would have to travel for resources and learn to trade with other people. By traveling they would find more things and create more things like tools and things to haul thee goods. Hunters and gatherers in cold climates would have a lot harder time than people in warm climates because it's very hard to find food in the winter time and they would have to find ways to keep and preserve their food in the winter time. By making it harder on themselves by living in colder climates it would lead to a more advanced civilization.
ReplyDeleteThe topic I am most interested in is the ice age. The ice age is interesting because Wisconsin is going through a cold time right now and it kinda feels like the ice age right now. This topic is from excerpt 1.
The theory I found most interesting was genetics. In excerpt two, it states, “With the later rise of genetics, the explanations were recast once again, in genetic terms. Europeans became considered genetically more intelligent than Africans, and especially more so than Aboriginal Australians.” It was thought that, because our their biology and the way their genetics are made up, the Europeans were smarter and that's how they had more cargo than the Africans. I find this interesting because yes, you can inherit traits from your parents but the color of your skin doesn’t define you as smart or not. The emerging topic I found interesting was civilization. In excerpt two, page one, it states, “Third, don’t words such as “civilization,” and phrases such as “rise of civilization,” convey the false impression that civilization is good, tribal hunter-gatherers are miserable, and history for the past 13,000 years has involved progress toward greater human happiness?” I find this interesting because back then, there wasn’t technology like we have today. There were a lot of changes made and not everyone wanted change. Even now a days, older people who didn’t have a phone in their younger years, normally never got one because they didn’t want the change. The way they live and do things works for them.
ReplyDeleteThe theory that I found most interesting was climate because he had some good points for example in excerpt 3 on pg. 1 Diamond said, “ Perhaps cold climates require one to be more technologically inventive to survive, because one must build a warm home and make warm clothing, whereas one can survive in tropics with simpler housing and no clothing.” People that live in warmer climates can only deal with with warmer climates. For example, if someone from Florida came here to Wisconsin during the winter when the temperature is varying low they are going to be very cold because they are used to warmer climates.
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting topic I thought was the IQ differences because I would like to know more about it. I got this from excerpt 2 pg 3 were it says, “An enormous effort by cognitive psychologists has gone into the search for differences in IQ between peoples of different geographic origins now living in the same country.” I want to know more about why the IQ’s were so important and what made them different.