In a message dated 1/28/2003 9:36:06 AM Eastern Standard Time, [log in to unmask]

> The issue is not about determinism, either genetic or environmental or
> both together; the issue is about what we can change whether or not our
> world is deterministic. A fascinating perspective on the misguided issue
> of genetic determinism is provided by Jared Diamond in his magnificent
> book Guns, Germs, and Steel (1997). The question Diamond poses, and
> largely answers, is why it is that "Western" people (Europeans or
> Eurasians) have conquered, colonized, and otherwise dominated "Third
> World" people instead of vice versa. Why didn't the human populations of
> the Americas or Africa, for instance, create worldwide empires by
> invading, killing, and enslaving Europeans? Is the answer ... genetic?
> Is science showing us that the ultimate source of Western dominance is
> in our genes? On first encountering this question, many people -- even
> highly sophisticated scientists -- jump to the conclusion that Diamond,
> by merely addressing this question, must be entertaining some awful
> racist hypothesis about European genetic superiority. So rattled are
> they by this suspicion that they have a hard time taking in the fact
> (which he must labor mightily to drive home) that he is saying just
> about the opposite: The secret explanation lies not in our genes, not in
> human genes, but it does lie to a very large extent in genes -- the
> genes of the plants and animals that were the wild ancestors of all the
> domesticated species of human agriculture.

Nope, it can't be genetic. The chinese invented half the technology. So why
didn't the breakthrough occur in China?

Check out the discussion of this at <A HREF=""></A>

John Landon
Website for
World History and the Eonic Effect