Papers are due in seminar on Tuesday, October 23rd or Wednesday, October 24th. Papers should be 1500 worlds in length, double-spaced in medium font (Times is recommended) with proper citation, bibliography, and a title. Please be sure to orient your reader to the topic at hand and build a strong argument around a strong thesis. Find productive comparisons and contrasts, and be creative in your approach to the topic. As you build your argument, integrate examples from the texts and from lecture and seminar.
1. The view that the environment is the ultimate cause of human development(s) can invite the labels "environment determinism," or, as Diamond anticipates, "geographic determinism" (408). Compare Leakey's and Diamond's emphasis on environmental factors in forms of human development. Are you convinced by their respective approaches? Why or why not? Do you find one more convincing and / or consistent than the other?
2. "The urge to know is a defining feature of humanity" (Leakey, 340). But exactly how we know is not so standard. Compare Leakey's view of origins to a religious / cultural origin story. What do you see as the similarities and differences? Why are humans so obsessed with their origins? Using Leakey's text as your base, explore what, ultimately, is at stake in this "search."
3. Leakey and Diamond both propose to blur disciplinary boundaries, to "muddy the waters." Leakey admits an "extrascientific, more philosophical and metaphysical" dimension to his scientific search for human origins. And Diamond argues that history does not fit as snugly into "the humanities" as most historians might think. How does this blurring of disciplinary boundaries contribute to their respective search for origins? Do you find these attempts convincing? Do you find one more persuasive than the other? Why or why not?
4. The image of "Man the Hunter" has been romaticized in popular fiction and Hollywood movies about early humans, often ignoring the role(s) of women in prehistoric society. What roles does Leakey assign respectively to females and males in his description of the origins of humanity? Do you think Leakey contributes to, revises, or denies this romantic tradition, and how does he do so?
5. Leakey and Diamond each claim to be using a non-Eurocentric approach to origins and history. How do these two authors resist a Eurocentric approach? What types of approaches does each use instead? What significance is there to having a non-Eurocentric focus to the search for origins?
6. It seems logical to suppose that history's pattern reflects innate differences among people themselves” (25). Yet, Diamond suggests that race-based explanations of history are unreliable and even "loathsome." Why does Diamond take this position, and what evidence does he offer to bolster his argument? Do you find it convincing? Make sure to consider the implications of race-based versus alternative theories of history in your response.
7. How do Leakey and Diamond approach the issue of time in their respective works? Specifically, how does each author use particular models of time to think about origins? And how do such models then affect the kind of history that is written? Be sure to consider the implications of various orientations to time in your response, including "Eurocentric" approaches.