User Controls
Race is a social construct
-
2021-03-17 at 2:11 PM UTC
-
2021-03-17 at 2:20 PM UTC
-
2021-03-17 at 2:22 PM UTC
-
2021-03-17 at 2:59 PM UTC
Originally posted by Obbe This right here, Craig Nelson has nothing to say to this.
Because for some reason people like him don't feel validated in racism unless they can try to claim it has some scientific value.
Like they can still be racist, but they would just have to admit it's got nothing to do with their mangled understanding of basic genetics: they just don't like being around brown people.
Which would be fair enough if they just said it. But it's got nothing to do with science, it is about social division. They just NEED it to be wrapped in pseudoscientific baloney to swallow it.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-03-17 at 3:03 PM UTC
Originally posted by Joseph R. Biden Jr, 46th President of the United States of America Because for some reason people like him don't feel validated in racism unless they can try to claim it has some scientific value.
Like they can still be racist, but they would just have to admit it's got nothing to do with their mangled understanding of basic genetics, they just don't like brown people.
Which, hey, fair enough. But it's got absolutely nothing to do with science.
but muh muscle twitch fiberzz -
2021-03-17 at 3:28 PM UTC
Originally posted by Joseph R. Biden Jr, 46th President of the United States of America Categories such as "black, white, Asian, Jew" etc were constructed by society for the sake of social convenience and don't map onto any well defined aspect of nature itself, like money.
those categories have a genetic basis, do they not? money is an abstract medium to exchange goods but the goods themselves are very concrete, so is biology. culture and behavior is more abstract but it cannot be ignored that people gravitate towards those who are similar to themselves and congregate accordingly.
so if you say the latter part is a social construct, you are technically right but then the point is too redundant to make a fuss of in the first place. what actual point are you trying to get across?No not "sub race", race. Then you would agree that populations with similar average foot speeds are one race, right?
this is an extreme oversimplification but yes, similar genes give a population similar traits.By the trait we have just identified, running speed, you must classify him under the same category as the fast running Kalenjins. Because that is the criteria for the classification.
If not, you are appealing to some third "racial" property and not to the running speed at all, which was what you're trying to use to establish that property (of race) in the first place. It is circular logic.
it was one example that showcased a biological basis for race. you agreed it isnt just a social construct that kalenjins run faster than nonkalenjins. different races have different traits that give them certain advantages and disadvantages, nothing to do with any social construct but genetic reality.We actually do have a categorization that can easily resolve this problem. It's called genetics.
thank you!If he somehow has the same gene strongly associated with footspeed that Kalenjin do (maybe one of his grandmothers 40 times removed fucked a negro in the south of Italy and just by chance it pervaded through his otherwise entirely Italian ancestry), then you can rightfully connect the part of his lineage responsible for that to the same one as Kalenjins. If not and he is just fast due to some other lucky genetic or developmental factor, there's no connection. And that's pretty straightforward, as opposed to doing these weird mental gymnastics that become necessary to attempt an accurate description of human variation.
yeah but you are leaving something out, that gene that gives them the superior running advantage cannot exist without other traits, such as extremely dark skin among many other things. one part of the code affects all the others. its all connected.Do humans from the region now known as Ukraine possess the same kind of DNA as humans from the region now known as Italy?
answer my question first. i need to know where you are coming from. do you dispute any part of that sentence? -
2021-03-17 at 3:39 PM UTC
Originally posted by Kev those categories have a genetic basis, do they not? money is an abstract medium to exchange goods but the goods themselves are very concrete, so is biology. culture and behavior is more abstract but it cannot be ignored that people gravitate towards those who are similar to themselves and congregate accordingly.
so if you say the latter part is a social construct, you are technically right but then the point is too redundant to make a fuss of in the first place. what actual point are you trying to get across?
this is an extreme oversimplification but yes, similar genes give a population similar traits.
it was one example that showcased a biological basis for race. you agreed it isnt just a social construct that kalenjins run faster than nonkalenjins. different races have different traits that give them certain advantages and disadvantages, nothing to do with any social construct but genetic reality.
thank you!
yeah but you are leaving something out, that gene that gives them the superior running advantage cannot exist without other traits, such as extremely dark skin among many other things. one part of the code affects all the others. its all connected.
answer my question first. i need to know where you are coming from. do you dispute any part of that sentence?
no need to tldr.
ask him if his neanderthalic rohingya society constructed this.
-
2021-03-17 at 3:46 PM UTC
-
2021-03-17 at 3:54 PM UTCThe following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire!
-
2021-03-17 at 4:09 PM UTC
Originally posted by Joseph R. Biden Jr, 46th President* of the United States of America Because for some reason people like him don't feel validated in racism unless they can try to claim it has some scientific value.
Like they can still be racist, but they would just have to admit it's got nothing to do with their mangled understanding of basic genetics: they just don't like being around brown people.
Which would be fair enough if they just said it. But it's got nothing to do with science, it is about social division. They just NEED it to be wrapped in pseudoscientific baloney to swallow it.
haha, I beat your argument like it was a 14-year-old Palestinian boy in Israeli custody so you closed your eyes and put your fingers in your ears and went lalala--didn't read--like a little girl and refused to engage the actual argument like a man head to head. But here you are, you gonna sally forth and attack a "they" and "their" belief because "Because for some reason people like him don't feel validated in racism unless they can try to claim it has some scientific value." Why don't you point to something I wrote that justifies that sentence. You won't, because you can't. You wouldn't debate my actual argument, so instead you make something up ascribe it to me and then attack that.
Weak.
Here's some more weakness: you won't say whether you are jedi. What are you afraid of? Is it shame?
I stand by my views in public using my real name. You won't even own your truth behind the anonymity of a screen name.The following users say it would be alright if the author of this post didn't die in a fire! -
2021-03-17 at 4:19 PM UTC
Originally posted by Kev those categories have a genetic basis, do they not?
No because nobody had any idea about genetics was until the year 1865, and then Mendel's paper remained mostly unknown for another 40+ yearsmoney is an abstract medium to exchange goods but the goods themselves are very concrete
Goods and services. "Services" aren't concrete at all. And what, you think "goods" are somehow etched into the laws of nature? You don't think "goods and services" are socially constructed categories?so is biology.
Yes we actually have a scientific study of biology now, it's called biology. Societies are also real and they are studied by social sciences.culture and behavior is more abstract but it cannot be ignored that people gravitate towards those who are similar to themselves and congregate accordingly.
And you think this is something other than social construction? What?so if you say the latter part is a social construct, you are technically right but then the point is too redundant to make a fuss of in the first place. what actual point are you trying to get across?
How is it "redundant"? Where is the redundancy? It's just a fact that you need to admit: the concept of race is a pre genetic abstraction and is socially constructed, and it doesn't map to any well defined scientific concept.this is an extreme oversimplification but yes, similar genes give a population similar traits.
So if a white skinned Norwegian has brown eyes and a dark Kenyan has brown eyes, they are the same race right?it was one example that showcased a biological basis for race. you agreed it isnt just a social construct that kalenjins run faster than nonkalenjins. different races have different traits that give them certain advantages and disadvantages, nothing to do with any social construct but genetic reality.
I'm telling you you've done nothing to use it to establish a biological basis for race, you've just appealed to the concept of race again. It is circular reasoning and that literally invalidates your point.thank you!
That makes my point, not yours.yeah but you are leaving something out, that gene that gives them the superior running advantage cannot exist without other traits, such as extremely dark skin among many other things. one part of the code affects all the others. its all connected.
I.e. you straight up do not understand how genetics work at all< discrete vs continuous traits etc.
Back to the example of Chief Spotted Crow's 1/64th native american great [great great...] granddaughter who might get his perfect hair genes as the ones that are expressed white being 63/64th balding Irish but those genes were not what she got for her hair. Perfectly possible scenario because by chance those alleles were passed down to her.answer my question first. i need to know where you are coming from. do you dispute any part of that sentence?
It just doesn't mean what you think it means. -
2021-03-17 at 5:57 PM UTC
-
2021-03-17 at 6:01 PM UTC
-
2021-03-18 at 4:03 AM UTC
Originally posted by FreeAssange haha, I beat your argument like it was a 14-year-old Palestinian boy in Israeli custody so you closed your eyes and put your fingers in your ears and went lalala–didn't read–like a little girl and refused to engage the actual argument like a man head to head. But here you are, you gonna sally forth and attack a "they" and "their" belief because "Because for some reason people like him don't feel validated in racism unless they can try to claim it has some scientific value." Why don't you point to something I wrote that justifies that sentence. You won't, because you can't. You wouldn't debate my actual argument, so instead you make something up ascribe it to me and then attack that.
Weak.
Here's some more weakness: you won't say whether you are jedi. What are you afraid of? Is it shame?
I stand by my views in public using my real name. You won't even own your truth behind the anonymity of a screen name.
Didn't read^ -
2021-03-18 at 7:27 AM UTCYou know how much of a loser it makes you seem to willfully engage in a debate with someone, just to reply "didn't read."
Nothing against you, but we all come here for social discourse. So if you're not going to read things that disagree with you and then reply "Didn't read,' like wow.
I'm happy I'm not that pathetic I start arguments with others, just to tell " I'M NOT LISTENING" when they start talking shit back.
That makes you a bitch. Have fun arguing with yourself about how you're right. LOL. -
2021-03-18 at 11:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by Bradley You know how much of a loser it makes you seem to willfully engage in a debate with someone, just to reply "didn't read."
Nothing against you, but we all come here for social discourse. So if you're not going to read things that disagree with you and then reply "Didn't read,' like wow.
I'm happy I'm not that pathetic I start arguments with others, just to tell " I'M NOT LISTENING" when they start talking shit back.
That makes you a bitch. Have fun arguing with yourself about how you're right. LOL.
Shut the fuck up faggot.
I'm not going to read people's stupid wall of fucking text when they clearly, CLEARLY didn't bother to read what I wrote, or just straight up won't. FagAssange from the literal first time he replied to me, blatantly failed to actually read or understand anything I said.
So sorry, not my responsibility to wrangle mentally retarded illiterates.
Notice I'm still talking to Kev normally, because even though he's having trouble grasping the concept, he still tries to at least read all of what he replying to. It's not a COMPLETE waste of time and I don't have any problem replying to him in detail because at the bare minimum he bothered to fully comprehend what I'm saying.
Rather than just not and fucking babbling.
If that is what you plan to do... Didn't read. -
2021-03-18 at 11:39 AM UTC
Originally posted by Joseph R. Biden Jr, 46th President of the United States of America Shut the fuck up faggot.
I'm not going to read people's stupid wall of fucking text when they clearly, CLEARLY didn't bother to read what I wrote, or just straight up won't. FagAssange from the literal first time he replied to me, blatantly failed to actually read or understand anything I said.
So sorry, not my responsibility to wrangle mentally retarded illiterates.
Notice I'm still talking to Kev normally, because even though he's having trouble grasping the concept, he still tries to at least read all of what he replying to. It's not a COMPLETE waste of time and I don't have any problem replying to him in detail because at the bare minimum he bothered to fully comprehend what I'm saying.
Rather than just not and fucking babbling.
If that is what you plan to do… Didn't read.
Didn't read -
2021-03-18 at 1:07 PM UTCYeah Kev is just stupid. A lot of people aren't worth reading. I learned this by reading their posts, and then choosing long term to stop. Some people here have no common sense or logical understanding of issues. I can have discussion with people I disagree with, but there is a limit, and for me that limit is reading the posts of self admitted pedophiles
-
2021-03-18 at 2:30 PM UTC
Originally posted by Bradley You know how much of a loser it makes you seem to willfully engage in a debate with someone, just to reply "didn't read."
Craig Nelson just proclaims his opponent "lost the argument" without actually having one in the first place. He stated his recognition that race is a social construct, asking "so what?" without even attempting to debate the fact, and then blathered on with paragraphs of empty rhetoric, again, not debating the fact. Ironic, you calling someone else a loser while you are so stupid to actually be tricked by his sophistry and need it to be explained to you like this. -
2021-03-18 at 2:43 PM UTC
Originally posted by Antifa Member phrenology and other psuedosciences can go fuck themselves
"Phrenology, which focuses on personality and character, is distinct from craniometry, which is the study of skull size, weight and shape, and physiognomy, the study of facial features. Method . Phrenology is a process that involves observing and/or feeling the skull to determine an individual's psychological attributes."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phrenology
aztec failed his simple english class.
