Comments on: Anthropologists vs. Jared Diamond in the NY Times http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/ Notes and Queries in Anthropology — A Group Blog Fri, 25 May 2012 11:29:38 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Kerim http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/comment-page-1/#comment-166829 Kerim Fri, 04 Jan 2008 09:22:06 +0000 http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/#comment-166829 @Daniel, Thanks for the comments. @Daniel,

Thanks for the comments.

Report this comment

]]> By: Daniel Taghioff http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/comment-page-1/#comment-166771 Daniel Taghioff Fri, 04 Jan 2008 07:48:14 +0000 http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/#comment-166771 I really liked the critique of seeing things through the lense of "cargo" or commodities. This is clearly a form of alienation as you point out, and is tied to the recent trend to ignore all things relational or distributional. But as you point out economists like Sen cite relative poverty as often more significant than absolute levels of purchasing power, in terms of health and life quality. . De Long's accusation of "injelligence" is just another argument along the lines of "you are jealous because we are rich" which Diamond's take on Yali's question is also quite close to. Blaut's points that Diamond's thesis does not really extend well into the periods of European domination makes it clear that there is a kind of supremacist "manifest destiny" argument hidden in Jared's account. Neither commodity fetishism nor Euro - American economic dominance are inevitable historical products of nature, and you do well to point this out. Having said that, I welcome Diamond's points about how dependent on food sources human groups have been at some points in history. That aspect of his work I find refreshing, since it reminds us that our sense of inevitable power over nature may well be hubris. I really liked the critique of seeing things through the lense of “cargo” or commodities. This is clearly a form of alienation as you point out, and is tied to the recent trend to ignore all things relational or distributional.

But as you point out economists like Sen cite relative poverty as often more significant than absolute levels of purchasing power, in terms of health and life quality. .

De Long’s accusation of “injelligence” is just another argument along the lines of “you are jealous because we are rich” which Diamond’s take on Yali’s question is also quite close to.

Blaut’s points that Diamond’s thesis does not really extend well into the periods of European domination makes it clear that there is a kind of supremacist “manifest destiny” argument hidden in Jared’s account.

Neither commodity fetishism nor Euro – American economic dominance are inevitable historical products of nature, and you do well to point this out.

Having said that, I welcome Diamond’s points about how dependent on food sources human groups have been at some points in history. That aspect of his work I find refreshing, since it reminds us that our sense of inevitable power over nature may well be hubris.

Report this comment

]]> By: Alex http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/comment-page-1/#comment-166456 Alex Thu, 03 Jan 2008 23:24:25 +0000 http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/#comment-166456 For an effective critique of Diamond see (if you don't know it already) James Blaut, Eight Eurocentric Historians (2000). For an effective critique of Diamond see (if you don’t know it already) James Blaut, Eight Eurocentric Historians (2000).

Report this comment

]]> By: js http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/comment-page-1/#comment-161731 js Sat, 29 Dec 2007 04:18:33 +0000 http://savageminds.org/2007/12/25/anthropologists-vs-jared-diamond-in-the-ny-times/#comment-161731 Thank you, Kerim, for the link of Frederick K. Errington and Deborah B. Gewertz's old posts. I don't like Diamond's theory for similar reasons but it is great pleasure to read their posts/points which were so well written and well argued. Thank you, Kerim, for the link of Frederick K. Errington and Deborah B. Gewertz’s old posts. I don’t like Diamond’s theory for similar reasons but it is great pleasure to read their posts/points which were so well written and well argued.

Report this comment

]]>