| ▲ | ggm 2 days ago | ||||||||||||||||
Graeber is controversial. Archeologists hate how he argues by ad hominem and does not appear to understand the works he cites, to make his argument. I can't speak to his work on finance as a whole. Regarding deep time, his claims about pre-literate society from archeology are not widely supported, they use thin evidence to argue badly. His anarcho-socialism isn't the concern. It's his lack of historicity, and inability to bring his peers with him on radical ideas which concerns me. He's dead, he can't defend himself. So there's that. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | DavidPiper 2 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Just in case anyone is put off by this comment, I want to second the recommendation of Debt: The First 5000 Years. It's excellent, and it has as a free, chapter-by-chapter audiobook on YouTube. As for Graeber being controversial: yes, though I vaguely recall "The Dawn of Everything" being (moreso) the trove of interesting historical anthropological hypotheses, rather than "Debt"? Anyway, it's been a while, but my main point is that I wouldn't let Graeber's controversial-ness stop anyone from reading Debt. If anything, going in with that information makes you think harder about the topics he covers. | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | romanhn 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
Fun fact, David Graeber had an HN account: https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=davidgraeber | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | gessha 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
As a fan of Graeber, I’m interesting in reading counter arguments to his writing. Could you point out where I can read up more about what archaeologists think of his writing? | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||