Considerations:
- Good discussion questions should reference a specific point or idea in the text.
- Good discussion questions require critical analysis skills.
- Good discussion questions challenges one to demonstrate factual knowledge and an understanding of the geo-political, socio-historical context of the issue.
- Example: In the epilogue, Diamond states, "The histories of the Fertile Crescent and China also hold a salutary lesson for the modern world: circumstances change, and past primacy is no guarantee of future primacy"(GGS, 417). Discuss historical and contemporary examples that support or refute this assertion. (NOTE: This question is from the epilogue. You are only required to read and answer questions about the Prologue and Parts I, II, & III.)
Each student must create UNIQUE discussion questions. All comments are dated and time stamped - check previous comments to be sure you aren't duplicating someone else's question.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteOn page 38, Diamond discusses the topic of Neanderthals and the characteristics that they began to develop. For example, Neanderthals were the first humans to care for the sick and bury the dead, why do you think that is? What was different in Neanderthals that triggered this gesture? Since the Neanderthals were the first to do this, do you think the following generations learned from them or was it instinct as well?
ReplyDeleteWe'll be considering this question in our first unit. Neanderthals are a hominid species but not technically humans.
DeleteDiamond mentions on page 88 that herders and farmers used specific plants to farm, providing them with 90% of the food's energy as compared to the 10% and less that is provided by carnivorous animals. If eating plants gives more energy to the consumers than eating animals does, why doesn't the world live in a strict plant-based diet? Plants are resources that can be renewed more easily than animals can, so wouldn't there be a less of a loss from eating many plants rather than eating many animals that take time to reproduce? Arguments could be that plants do not offer much protein to the consumer. Diamond mentions that the farmers got their proteins from eating animal meat. Why can't humans get their protein from high protein plants, such as asparagus and broccoli, or protein-packed nuts such as almonds and peanuts?
ReplyDeleteExcellent question! There are some environmentalists have actually taken this position and argue that we should shift towards a diet based on plants.
DeleteIn the beginning and end of chapter 9, pages 151 and 162, Diamond talks about the "Anna Karenina Principle." He uses this principle to explain the domestication of some animals and not others, as well as the variables that he thought of that go along with the principle. The Anna Karenina Principle states that in a process or situation, if not all of the variables are met, then the process ultimately fails. He explains that if not all of the requirements are met of a species, than they cannot be domesticated. How did people determine what animals could be domesticated and which could not? What are some other variables you can think of that would result in the failure to domesticate? Would there be any way to change a specific variable in a species so that it could be domesticated?
ReplyDeleteIn chapter five, Diamond mentions that it took an abundance of time to develop an efficient farming system. This raises questions concerning geography and how it affects food production; for example, why did some areas independently develop more profitable food production? Furthermore, why was there such variation in the time that it took for food production to develop?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of the third chapter, Diamond addresses that literacy helped Pizarro to defeat Atahaullpa. Pizarro and an army of less than 200 conquered an army of 80,000 Native Americans. Pizarro had studied information coming back from Columbus and other explorers, helping him learn the landscape and much about his opponent. The Inca empire had no writing system. Why was there such a difference in literacy at the time?What specific advantages did literacy bring the Spaniards? In what ways does literacy contribute to modern warfare?
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of chapter two Diamond talks about the clash between the Maori and Moriori tribes. Although they both originated as Polynesian people he says that they split off opposite ways. Diamond says that after splitting off the Moriori developed peaceful principles, whereas the Maori tribe developed war-like principles. This raises the question, does the geography surrounding these two tribes affect their social behavior in any way? Does the confined Chatham Islands that the Moriori tribe inhabited force them to develop peaceful social behavior among them? Does the open land of Northern New Zealand that the Maori tribe inhabits cause them to develop hostile and combative social behavior?
ReplyDeleteInteresting question. William H. McNeill explored this question in "The Pursuit of Power."
DeleteAt the beginning of chapter seven, pages 114 and 115, Diamond discusses the domestication of crops, especially almonds. 10,000 years ago, the first farmers did not have an existing crop to give them inspiration to create new ones. In modern times, professional scientists use molecular genetic techniques to develop new crops. How did the first farmers domesticate plants into crops without knowing how to genetically change them? Why were some plants domesticated before others? How long did it take for almonds to change so the cyanide contained in them would not be harmful to humans?
ReplyDeleteIn the beginning of chapter three Diamond discusses about the biggest shift of modern times ha been the colonization of the New World by Europeans. Diamond also states that the New World was initially colonized by the way of Alaska, the Bering Strait, and SIberia. Therefore, I am confused why the Europeans effected the colonization of the New World was so drastic. As a result of this, I wonder What caused the Europeans to have such a great effect in the New World? Furthermore, What evidence is there to prove this?
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 11 of "Gun Germs and Steel" Jared Diamond proposes that farmers "tend to breathe nastier germs, to own better weapons and armor, to own more powerful technology in general, and to live under centralized governments with literate elites better able to wage wars of conquest" (Diamond 195). Based off science. germs and much more organisms are constantly evolving. Of the many organisms, human is one. Organisms go through natural selection to be given better and stronger traits. However, as we human and animals are evolving, the bacteria, germs, and viruses are also. "Mircrobes have evolved diverse ways of spreading from one person to another, and from animals to people” (Diamond 198). Which leads to the question why there still hasn't been a cure found for many diseases and sicknesses such as AIDS, Polio, and Asthma. Although, there are ways to make sure the sicknesses affect you the least, people are still not able to be cured. Just AIDS alone, scientist have been trying to solve for years and years. Yet, no exact cure has been found. If diseases and sicknesses were to evolve faster than humans, would the human race essentially be wiped out?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe prologue of the book, Jared Diamond states that “History followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples’ environments, not because of biological differences among peoples themselves” (25). Essentially, this was suppose to summarize the entire book. However, in chapter 7, Diamond proposes such factors such as natural selection, and even genetic mutations are responsible for some dominates in the different species of plants. But the question arising from that statement is, could that theory technically be applied to humans as well? Rather than racism and other judgements, could the superiority of certain people be caused by the genetic coding of the individual?
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 5, Diamond asks why only some land were developed into farms. "Instead, what cries out for explanation is the failure of food production to appear, until modern times, in some ecologically very suitable areas that are among the world's richest centers of agriculture and herding today" (Diamond 93). How did "marginal land' described before change into the most productive and fertile land of today?
ReplyDeleteDuring chapter two, Diamond talks about how the Polynesian people split off into two different tribes. The Maori and the Moriori Tribes. Although these tribes are both filled with all Polynesian people, the difference between them is interesting. The Moriori became peaceful and the Maori became war-like. Was it because of the other indigenous people that were on this land? Or was it because the two groups just had different religious and ethical values?
ReplyDeleteIn chapter seven, Diamond discusses how certain plants and fruits are adapted to be eaten by other animals. He says that “strawberries are adapted to birds, acorns are adapted to squirrels, mangos to bats, and some sedges to ants.” He also states that natural selection caused certain plants to be adapted for certain animals. How do you think those certain species of animals became better adapted to eating those specific fruits and plants? Is it all based on what nutrients their bodies needed? What first started those species of animals to eat those plants?
ReplyDeleteIn chapter 6 on page 106, Diamond talks about mobile groups of food producers. He says that the group would plant their crop, and then leave for a while. Then they may come back to pick weeds, and check up on their crops. Then they may leave again, and come back to harvest. There are a lot of variables that could destroy the crop such as animals, weather, and the experimentation of if the crops would grow. Would the benefit of getting a season of crops be worth it if all those variables are going against success?
ReplyDeleteThis is a transhumance system. Some believe this was a combination of experimentation and serendipity.
DeleteIn chapter 7 Diamond talks about how many foods are dangerous for humans to eat and how they were domesticated. He goes on to talk more specifically about almonds and how they were domesticated. Diamond explains in his argument that he thinks as time went on the bitter nonpoisonous almond trees were intentionally planted. Diamond asumes that the majority of the almond trees were poisonous from the start. He does not talk about the probability that the almonds were originally safe to eat but as time went on they developed mutations which started making them poisonous. So the question still remains. Why does Diamond think that the almonds were poisonous from the start? How likely is it that over time the almonds actually became poisonous after they were already domesticated?
ReplyDeleteDiamond's discussion of the large amount of time it took to create efficient farming systems is discussed in chapter 5. Some places took more time to develop such a system, as other places did not take as long. This raises thoughts as to how some places developed faster than others in farming. How was there so much variation in the time it took for developing an efficient farming system? Was it because of geography, resources, intelligence, etc.? Why?
ReplyDeleteOn pages 163 and 164, Diamond discusses the "problems of captive breeding" in terms of why not all animal species can be domesticated. He mentions that some animals will simply not mate inside a cage, such as the cheetah. Why will some animal species mate in front of humans and others not? What could the scientists possibly do to make animals that are hesitant to participate in captive breeding, such as cheetahs, more comfortable in doing this? Diamond also mentions the vicuñas' long courtship ritual. Why will some animals mate quickly while others, such as the vicuñas, take a long time to do this?
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Guns Germs and Steel I still have questions about Diamonds quest to answer Yali’s question. While introducing himself and the questions he had about the world it made me question why he dedicated practically all of his life to figuring out a question a random man asked about? Why did Yali’s question almost seem as if it was haunting him? And why did Diamond pick a science career if he is so interested in how the world unfolded?
ReplyDeleteScience and history both seek to understand & explain the world but they use very different methodologies.
DeleteExplain your position if humans caused the extinction of many animal species during the settling of America through overhunting or germs. Diamond states in his book that he believes it was the over hunting of animals by native americans that drove many to extinction, while others attribute the extinctions to disease or climate change.
ReplyDeleteWhy would people move to Siberia after “The Great Leap Forward”? It says in the book how people started to move out from Africa and Eurasia into new lands, but why would anyone want to go to Siberia. They did not have technologies that we do today to keep us warm, so why would you go to one of the coldest places on Earth and decide to live there?
How do you think the Spaniards believed that they could overtake the Incas? The Incas were a humongous population, and to think that a small cavalry of Spaniards was able to conquer them is mind boggling. Furthermore, I do not know how the Spaniards thought they could defeat the large population even with their guns, which was a big advantage for them. Didn’t they think if they were attacked by arrows or just people they would surely lose?
I believe there was also a religious component to the conquest. In Europe, the crown and the Church were routing out heresy through Spanish Inquisition while the Spanish were conquering Latin America.
DeleteAs the world is becoming more global, could factors such as weapons, technology, and diseases still give certain populations an advantage as it did in the spanish and Inca war?
ReplyDeleteThe Native Americans have lived in America a long time, so why didn't they develop into a more advanced society like the Eurasia's did when they came to the US?
Did farming techniques improve because they were forced to keep up with the increasing population, or did the population start increasing due to improvement in farming techniques? Diamond argues that an increasing population is the result of farming technique advancement, but which one came first?