Print

Print


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

> 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="http://eonix.8m.com/enx_theory1.htm">http://eonix.8m.com/enx_theory1.htm</A>


John Landon
Website for
World History and the Eonic Effect
http://eonix.8m.com