> Nowhere does Diamond claim to have invented geographic determinism. He claims exactly that in the introduction to his book, alongside the explicit thesis tha

> Nowhere does Diamond claim to have invented geographic determinism. He claims exactly that in the introduction to his book, alongside the explicit thesis that the west had more "cargo" to start and continued to. > Much of the criticism of Diamond's work smells far more to me of academic jealousy over not respecting borders. What would it look like if it were historians dismissing poor work? > Most I've seen are, as yours, vague, broad, and themselves grossly flawed. Broad, yes. Vague, no. One of the central methodological problems in history is the selection of facts and material from which to construct an account. Diamond selects facts and material which support his theory, which is not a defensible choice. This is a broad critique, and it invalidates the whole work whether or not his particulars are correct.