MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W73025958

The World Until Yesterday: What Can We Learn from Traditional Societies? by Jared Diamond

2014· article· en· W73025958 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Linda Quest

Notice bibliographique

RevueInternational social science review · 2014
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueIsland Studies and Pacific Affairs
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésYesterdayPoliticsPopulationState (computer science)HomelandSociologyGovernment (linguistics)LawPolitical economyPolitical scienceMedia studies
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Diamond, Jared. The World Until Yesterday: What Can We Learn from Traditional Societies? New York: Viking, 2012. 512 pages. Hardcover, $36.00. Geographer Jared Diamond has done it again. In The World until Yesterday, the celebrated author of Guns, Germs, and Steel and Collapse has given us another thought-provoking and fascinating book. As in his previous writing, he brings together multiple disciplines, including anthropology, economics, sociology, political science, and psychology, to draw lessons from a pastiche of human cultures. Diamond's subjects live in traditional societies and in state societies, in bands, clans, tribes, chiefdoms, in WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) societies, and more. They include Aboriginal Australians, Ache Indians, Aka Pygmies, iKung, Inuit, Nuer, and others, particularly New Guineans, whose homeland is Diamond's principle area of expertise. They differ. Some practice idiosyncratic customs, such as widow strangulation or elderly abandonment. Some allow children to play with sharp knives or fire, to wander off for days from home. Taken together, these subjects illuminate mantras of political science and justifications of government. People live in groups. They never completely agree. Conflicts are bound to arise. Diamond shows us that all societies have conflicts, but he argues that state societies are both necessary in a complex, population-dense world and advantageous--shown in words and movements of traditional individuals and peoples. Diamond summarizes: [A] prime concern of effective state government is to guarantee or at least improve public safety by preventing the state's citizens from using force against each other (p. 97). He also illuminates the legitimacy of Criminal Justice and of Peace and Justice Studies among the social sciences--the overriding goal of state is to maintain society's stability by providing a mandatory alternative to do-it-yourself justice (p. 99), and maintenance of peace within a society is one of the most important services that a state can provide (p. 98). The appreciation of persons for this is reflected in the ease with which they gave up thousands of years of practicing traditional war. The current of change at present is running from traditional societies to state societies. Hunter-gatherers and small-scale farmers aspire to a Westernized lifestyle and seek to enter the modern world. For his part, Diamond regularly visits Papua New Guinea, but has no intention of moving there. New Guineans themselves know the modern world offers huge advantages: state-imposed peace that they could not achieve for themselves, steel tools, material goods that make life easier, opportunities for formal education and jobs, access to information, access to a broad diversity of people, more rights for women, good health, effective health care, less violence, less danger, and more food security. The comparisons are perceptible to traditional villagers. WEIRD peoples have much longer lives and lower frequency of experiencing the deaths of their children. Nevertheless, traditional children are more self-assured, inventive, and mature, more capable of coping with challenges and dangers while still enjoying their lives more than WEIRD kids. Such considerations prompt the question in the subtitle--What can we learn from traditional societies? Also, how can we do it? To answer this question, Diamond focuses on the practices that suffer from collective behavior and societal action. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,566
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,998

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,002
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,034
Tête enseignante GPT0,316
Écart entre enseignants0,282 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2014
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueInternational social science reviewMême sujetIsland Studies and Pacific AffairsTravaux en français237 207