What does /his/ think of "The Collapse of Complex Societies"

>>3283185
ha

/his/ doesn't read

most of the chapters are jargony wastes of time, and despite a clever idea the actual evidence is pretty weak. Of the three civs he cites, two practically have no written record and the other one is rome. And even then, he just sort of superimposes the decline of roman currency with the argument that returns must be diminishing! rather than actually prove anything. The marginal returns argument in particular seems to have been a misunderstanding of the term, since he thinks time is the acting component rather than quantity. Also, fuck him for dismissing decadence as mysticism

>>3283231
shut up

File: beavisandbutthead.gif (817KB, 400x224px) Image search: [Google]

817KB, 400x224px

>Joseph A. Tainter
>Tainter
>Taint

>>3283680
Whats the TLDR of his thesis?

>>3283185
I've actually read it but forgot about most of it, if not all. I suggest looking into mathematical ecologist turned historian Peter Turchin, see his blog. He said that he wasn't convinced by Tainter and offers a - not fully - competing theory or really model. Not fully because it is a model that deals with the collapse of authorities due to infighting.
I think one of the interesting things Peter Turchin said, and which I read in the Dictator's Handbook too, is that revolutions usually if not always fail if the authority is strong and cohesive i.e. no infighting between elites but cooperation.

>>3285093
diminishing marginal returns applies to everything

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0R09YzyuCI

don't read the study, watch the youtube clip lel

>>3283742
Uhuhhuhuhhuhuhhuhhuh

>>3283231
>>3283742
>>3287405
>same posting