Guns, Germs, and Steel PBS miniseries discussion thread.

[GePap]

Quick work there...



(bellow average IQ )

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
Drake is close to useless, as he only cares to step in when he thinks he can trap someone to say "look, they were wrong". In short, he rarely adds anything to debate.

Wait, what's wrong with jumping in just when you know you'll win? This particular strategy is practiced by most of the successful debaters on this board. Those that don't eventually get megapwned. Lord knows I've noticed that

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


Wait, what's wrong with jumping in just when you know you'll win? This particular strategy is practiced by most of the successful debaters on this board. Those that don't eventually get megapwned. Lord knows I've noticed that

You mean the intellectual cowards who can't argue the larger ideas but seek glory only by fleeting little pinpricks?

I would hardly call them successful debaters. But if that is the model you apire to, well, go ahead.

[Kuciwalker]

You mean the intellectual cowards who can't argue the larger ideas but seek glory only by fleeting little pinpricks?

I would hardly call them successful debaters. But if that is the model you apire to, well, go ahead.

These are the same people who have reputations for always owning the opposition... I won't name names, but if you don't think they're good debaters you are insane.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


These are the same people who have reputations for always owning the opposition... I won't name names, but if you don't think they're good debaters you are insane.

The couple I can think most prominently in that category do still engage in long debate about bigger ideas every once an a while. They show they can debate.

Drake is not in that category.

[Ted Striker]

What time does this **** start? 9PM?

[GePap]

And to return this thread to the point, which is a discussion of the ideas in Diamond's book initiated by his new series:

I think the series up to now has not been produced very well. The first episode did stick more to the geographic reaosns for the superiority of Eurasian farming. The problem is they did not go into the topic fully by discussing the indepedent development of farming in the various areas and how they differed.

From the show you would think everything began in the Fertile Crescent and then spread.

The second show I think does a very poor job, if only because too much is spent on narritive.

[Ted Striker]

Not on until 10PM here.

[GePap]

The episode is OK if you want to see how Pizzaro captures Atahulapa.

As a showcase of Diamond's ideas it is not the best.

[Theben]

Well the show touched on the main thrust of the book. It's unlikely this series will get into any detail.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by GePap
The couple I can think most prominently in that category do still engage in long debate about bigger ideas every once an a while. They show they can debate.

They engage in such debates when they can win them.

I'm sure they can win other ones, which they choose not to join into. However, I'm quite confident they do not debate when they suspect they will lose.

Drake is not in that category.

I never said he was.

[Drake Tungsten]

I never said he was.

That's good.

[GePap]

Originally posted by Theben
Well the show touched on the main thrust of the book. It's unlikely this series will get into any detail.

Well, if it had been a single episode, I would be fine. But it is a multi-episode series.

Its far too jumbled, they have jumped from point to point, and they gave so little time to the germ's part of the book.

They also, in the series, leave open the question about difference in Eurasia, which is what JohnT as a critic borught up. They say that Europe was in the best position to have the best Germs, Guns, and Steel, but they go no further than that.

Honestly, why couldn't Diamond have merged Both GGS and Collapse together in the series?

[GePap]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


They engage in such debates when they can win them.

I'm sure they can win other ones, which they choose not to join into. However, I'm quite confident they do not debate when they suspect they will lose.

How can one lose a debate on big ideas, such as the relative worth of geography vs. culture in determining the outcome of history?

That is what the debate of Diamond's work and the criticism of it that came up is in this thread.

[Kuciwalker]

How can one lose a debate on big ideas, such as the relative worth of geography vs. culture in determining the outcome of history?

See Cap/Com threads.