{"id":119,"date":"2014-05-09T00:31:00","date_gmt":"2014-05-09T00:31:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/beta.dminlgp.com\/?p=119"},"modified":"2014-08-11T21:45:51","modified_gmt":"2014-08-11T21:45:51","slug":"lifes-most-important-questions","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/lifes-most-important-questions\/","title":{"rendered":"Life\u2019s Most Important Questions\u2026"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jared Diamond was awarded the 1998 Pulitzer Prize for Journalism \u2013 General Nonfiction for his book, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies<\/em>.[1]<\/a>The award citation chronicles the worthiness of Diamond\u2019s work:<\/p>\n

No scientist brings more experience from the laboratory and field, none thinks more deeply about social issues or addresses them with greater clarity, than Jared Diamond \u2026 A major advance in our understanding of human societies, Guns, Germs, and Steel chronicles the way that the modern world, and its inequalities, came to be. It is a work rich in dramatic revelations that will fascinate readers even as it challenges conventional wisdom.[2]<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Diamond clearly states his purpose: To answer the question, \u201cWhy did history unfold differently on different continents?\u201d[3]<\/a> Diamond proposes a thesis pertaining to the question that springs out of his training in molecular physiology, linguistics, and, perhaps most significantly, his fieldwork as an evolutionary biologists.[4]<\/a> He notes that although the question is relevant and pertinent, there was no available research that encompassed the academic study necessary to answer the question. The study and research is succinctly stated by Diamond, \u201cHistory followed different courses for different peoples because of differences among peoples\u2019 environments, not because of biological differences among peoples themselves.\u201d[5]<\/a><\/p>\n

Diamond is able to synthesize his scientific and social\/historical study and research within the chronological context of humanity\u2019s existence. His work is comprehensive; he reviews opposing and conflicting ideas while acknowledging possible alternative answers to the questions advanced through the research. There is a vast contrast in the methodologies of scientific, historical, and social research. Diamond\u2019s academic methodology is creditable, authentic and authoritative. In the intervening nineteen chapters, he is able to restate his thesis in the conclusion, The \u00a0advancement of different people groups to higher levels in different time frames is \u201c\u2026due not to innate differences in the peoples themselves but to differences in their environments.\u201d[6]<\/a><\/p>\n

Although Diamond does not state an antithesis to answering his question, it is clear from the beginning that he is refuting and belief that the differences in people groups is based on genetic (inherent) intellectual superiority. Particularly in addressing Western culture, he states, \u201cToday, segments of Western society publicly repudiate racism. Yet many (perhaps most!) Westerners continue to accept racist explanations privately or subconsciously.\u201d[7]<\/a><\/p>\n

In an interview with NPR (National Public Radio) Diamond was questioned about how his research impacted the racial aspect, specifically when attempting to \u201cexplain why some societies conquered others?\u201d[8]<\/a> Diamond was asked to respond to the apparent reluctance of historians to address the subject as they \u201care somewhat embarrassed.\u201d Diamond responded:<\/p>\n

I think that\u2019s part of it. To talk about why some societies conquered others, it\u2019s not nice. History is full of lots of horrible stuff. And many people – including historians, not surprisingly – feel uncomfortable about even acknowledging or discussing the subject. But that\u2019s a shame because if you don\u2019t provide what the actual explanation is, people are going to fall back on the transparent racist explanation. Mainly, they\u2019ll say some people have different colored skins and different forms of hair and different eyes.<\/p>\n

We can see that, and, therefore, it\u2019s natural to assume that inside those skins, there are different brains. And therefore, people fall back on the transparent racist explanation even though there\u2019s no evidence for it.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Clearly the research refutes any possible racist stance for the differences in achievement by people groups. This remains a socio\/political issue in American society today. Unfortunately there remains a vestige (deeply rooted) of a racist idealism that would attribute issues such as test score failure, dropout rates and other achievement criterion to superior ability while ignoring environment, culture and geography that determines what we do and how we achieve.<\/p>\n

Additional observations<\/em>:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. \u00a0I ought to note that I do not have the same perspective on the creation and creativity of humanity that is espoused by Diamond. He seeks and \u201cultimate cause\u201d in his research; he acknowledges that scientific methodology, can never achieve or discover \u201cultimate cause or purpose.\u201d I can accept, without reservation, the thesis that superiority, achievement or value is not<\/em> a construct of race. I can also allow for the evolutionary perspective that many hold and interpret as the method and means for the \u201cultimate cause\u201d to create. I can and do, however, take the perspective that YHWH, the God of the Bible, both created and re-creates. Throughout YHWH\u2019s Word there is no reference to race nor is there racist treatment. All creation is good and is a part of YHWH\u2019s redemptive plan. From faith perspective, I can take the same stand that Diamond takes as a biology evolutionist, \u201cthe difficulties seem to me not fatal.\u201d[9]<\/a><\/li>\n
  2. D.W. Bebbington in Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s<\/em> approaches his writing from a similar perspective as Diamond; to address the lack of historical research and the impact of research on Western society. The historical time frame and the people focus are, of course, different but the approach and objectives are similar. \u00a0\u201cThe Evangelicals of Britain have been neglected,\u201d as he affirms his intention to \u201cfill a gap by providing an overall survey of the movement.\u201d[10]<\/a> William Sachs, in reviewing Bebbington\u2019s work, notes the neglect when he states \u201c\u2026 evangelicalism has been an elusive obsession for historians.\u201d[11]<\/a><\/li>\n
  3. In reviewing the differences between historical (social) science and non-historical science, Diamond notes four specific variances in research: \u201c\u2026methodology, causation, prediction, and complexity.\u201d[12]<\/a>\u00a0 It seems to me, this provides some insight into research which is particularly applicable for LGP4\u2019s context. \u00a0It is an interesting study to correlate the research problem, question, ministry application, theory, and methodology that comprises Guns, Germs and Steel<\/em>, with the process we are presently undergoing.[13]<\/a> I feel there is dimensional insight in Diamond\u2019s thoughts on causation, prediction and complexity.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n
    \n
    \n
    \n

    [1]<\/a> The Pulitzer Prizes \u2013 Columbia University, 1998 Winners and Finalists, The Pulitzer Prizes<\/em>. http:\/\/www.pulitzer.org\/awards\/1998<\/a> (accessed May 6, 2014).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [2]<\/a> W.W. Norton, 1997. The 1998 Pulitzer Prize Winners, The Pulitzer Prizes<\/em>. http:\/\/www.pulitzer.org\/works\/1998-General-Nonfiction<\/a> (accessed May 5, 2014).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [3]<\/a> Jared Diamond, Guns, Germs and Steel:The Fates of Human Societies<\/em> (London, UK: Vintage, 2005) Kindle, 71.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [4]<\/a> Ibid., 374<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [5]<\/a> Ibid., 351-352.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [6]<\/a> Ibid., 6537-5638<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [7]<\/a> Ibid., \u00a0225.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [8]<\/a> Diamond, \u201cUnderstanding History With \u2018Guns, Germs, And Steel\u2019,\u201d Talk of the Nation<\/em>, (NPR), Sept. 3, 2012.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [9]<\/a> Ibid., Guns\u2026, <\/em>6813.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [10]<\/a> D.W. Bebbington, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain A History from the 1730s to the 1980s<\/em> (New York, NY, Rutledge:1989) Kindle, 68.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [11]<\/a> William Sachs, \u201cBook review, Evangelicalism in Modern Britain: A History from the 1730s to the 1980s\u201d Journal of Religion<\/em>, 72, no. 1, (1992), 114-116<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [12]<\/a> Diamond, Guns\u2026<\/em> 6824.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

    \n

    [13]<\/a> William R. Myers, Research in Ministry<\/em> (Chicago, IL: Exploration Press, 1997).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    Jared Diamond was awarded the 1998 Pulitzer Prize for Journalism \u2013 General Nonfiction for his book, Guns, Germs and Steel: The Fates of Human Societies.[1]The award citation chronicles the worthiness of Diamond\u2019s work: No scientist brings more experience from the laboratory and field, none thinks more deeply about social issues or addresses them with greater […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":20,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[52],"class_list":["post-119","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-diamond","cohort-lgp4"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/20"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=119"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1439,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/119\/revisions\/1439"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=119"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=119"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dlgp\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=119"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}