3 ms·
I agree his later books were not as good, but this argument is ridiculous - evaluate GGS on its own terms, those don’t change if the author later writes poorer
by czzr 3y ago
I agree his later books were not as good, but this argument is ridiculous - evaluate GGS on its own terms, those don’t change if the author later writes poorer books.
- yyyk 3y agoWell, when one of the big arguments is whether Diamond absolves European colonialism, and in a later book he does exactly that, that does lead me to assume less good faith even in a previously written book. [EDIT: Note the title is "Jared Diamond: A Reply to His Critics". While the substance of the post is about GGS, the title is about Diamond. I think his other 'work' is fit for discussion under this title.]
- chongli 3y agoYeah. If we evaluated every author’s work based on their worst book or theory, we’d have to throw out everything Newton did because he wrote a lot of bunk about alchemy and the occult. Good thing we don’t do that, because calculus, gravity, and optics are extremely valuable.