Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

> Because he cannot bear that "...Europeans just lucked into it. "

His thesis is precisely that, so he can definitely bear it.

Ultra-summarising:

- The Americas fell behind because they eliminated large mammals before inventing domestication, and not having horses and cows is a huge setback.

- Sub-Saharan Africa fell behind because it is oriented north-south and there are a lot of different climates you have to travel through, and therefore technology exchange is harder.

- Eurasia had the east-west orientation that enabled tech exchange, so it was going to happen there.

- Of the Eurasian regions, China could have been first but being too unified meant that they were less competitive and less likely to repeat high-risk ventures until they worked. Europe was fragmented and competitive which led to faster innovation, including more focus on turning anything into a weapon (e.g. gunpowder, invented in China but turned into war devices in Europe) or a disruptor (paper & printing press).

All seems pretty logical, and does not ascribe Europe any superior moral character. It's just luck.

Unless, of course, you believe that being born in the right place at the right time is related to moral character rather than luck. But I don't think Diamond does that in his book.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: