Jenna Sullivan Sullivan من عند Ailsworth, Peterborough PE5 7BF، المملكة المتحدة
لا أعرف أنه كان هذا الكتاب الذي قرأته - ما زلت أفرغ بعض الكتب. كتاباته إلهية ، خاصة إذا كنت تعتقد أنه امرأة. أدهشني بشكل خاص خطاب واحد كتب فيه شيئًا مثل "نحن صمتان منفصلان نلتقي أحيانًا".
تخلط في الطرافة الجافة بشكل لا يصدق مع الشخصيات التي هي إما: 1. قطع الاتصال ، القذف ، البرد ، المنفصل ، وبلا قلب إلى حد القسوة أو 2. يرثى لها ، ساذج ، مثير للشفقة ، والجري ، ويمكنك الحصول على نظرة مسلية وغير مقيدة في القصص التي تكون مؤلمة في بعض الأحيان ولكن دائما مثيرة للاهتمام.
The development of humans from bands of hunter/gatherers 12000 years ago to urban dwellers/day laborers of today is laid out in an accessible and yet minutely and painstakingly referenced way. In relation to other books concerned with similar territory, this one seems to imply/assume that ALL the societies of the world would have become the dominating powerhouses of greed and genocide that ours has, had they been given the right combination of "start-up capital" and such... which may be a misreading on my part. But there is certainly no hint in here that rational, conscious decisions can be made by the people in any band/tribe/state regarding the development of their society. It seems to me a fascinating question. There are some (Daniel Quinn, Fredy Perlman) who say that the choice to abandon the path towards ever greater social organization has been made consciously by people of the Americas, among others perhaps. Observing human groups from the outside, on the other hand, would seem to suggest that humans are little different from rabbits (for example). Either group will devour all available resources in their environment until the population inevitably crashes to levels sustainable in the long-term, like a tragi-comedy written by Malthus. Specialist (anthropologist, archaeologist) friends have since said that this book is less than rigorous or less than true, or both. When I read it, I felt that it had both tackled incredibly important territory that is rarely addressed, and that it did this in a clear and powerfully explanatory manner. I would have to re-read the book to better be able to tell which view is true. I will say that in the "Collapse" book, Diamond seemed to showcase certain reactionary opinions that are much less obvious in this book, not to the advantage of his material. Certainly that one was a much lesser work than "The Collapse of Complex Societies" by Joseph A. Tainter, a monumental if monumentally dry study of societal complexity and collapse.