Guns germs and steel by jarad diamond Diamond restates his original question and sums up his major points here. What do you think he is saying about the future of human history as a science?

3 Answers | Add Yours

accessteacher's profile pic

accessteacher | High School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

This excellent book links together science and history through the way in which Diamond appeals to both disciplines in order to justify his thesis. What is unique about this book and the author is the multi-disciplinary nature of his argument. He appeals to so many different disciplines all of which are shown to be necessary in terms of supporting what he is trying to argue.

litteacher8's profile pic

litteacher8 | High School Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

Historians do take a scientific approach to history.  However, people cannot really be reduced to scientific explanation.  We can make generalizations, but people will continue to be unpredictable.  The same can definitely be said about studying history.  No matter what was base our theories on, sometimes we will never know.

pohnpei397's profile pic

pohnpei397 | College Teacher | (Level 3) Distinguished Educator

Posted on

He is saying that historians have to become more like scientists.  He says that they have to start using "natural experiments" to prove points about major trends in history.  He says that, if they do so, their discipline can become more objective and more like a science.

We’ve answered 318,991 questions. We can answer yours, too.

Ask a question