03-03-2004 01:19									#61
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Race among humans is a social construct. It only exists because we say it exists. People on the bottom tend to be "Black," regardless of their ancestral-origin, skin color, etc. People on the top tend to be "white," not that many of these "whites" would be recognizable as white to most Westerners. The human race is a continuem. There are no clearly recognized boundries between one group and anthore. We blend into each other. Furthermore, we can all interbreed.

You only believe this because the foundation of your ideology rests on it. There is a mountain of scientific evidence against you yet you continue in your beliefs because they provide a major justification for socialistic government programs.

	03-03-2004 01:40									#63
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

To elaborate - the belief that all humans are inherently equal justifies the use of government programs because it is assumed that human differences are purely the result of environment, and therefore the government should step in to make everyone's environment the same. This will make everyone "equal".

	03-03-2004 01:42									#64
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Caligastia You only believe this because the foundation of your ideology rests on it. There is a mountain of scientific evidence against you yet you continue in your beliefs because they provide a major justification for socialistic government programs.

#1, I would point out that you believe he opposite, and you also believe the socialism would be a good idea . . . when people are ready for it.

#2, your mountain of scientific evidence is more of a molehill. All I need to do is pick up Scientific American or Discover or National Geographic to see a confirmation of my beliefs on race. Unlike some, I base my beliefs on science. Science is pretty set against the idea of biological race in human beings.

On the other hand, there laws of this country (existing and previous), as well as many others are proof of my assertion that race is a social concept. If we have to make laws to define what people are, then race cannot be biological. We don't need to define dogs or horses in the law, but we did need to define Blacks, whites, Mexicans, Indians, Chinese, etc. The fact that American Blacks were legally white in apartheid South Africa is the ultimate proof of race as a social concept.

	03-03-2004 02:01									#65
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara #1, I would point out that you believe he opposite, and you also believe the socialism would be a good idea . . . when people are ready for it.

I definitely see capitalism as a means to an end. I have no doubt that if we were to look far into the future that things would appear very socialistic to us. When humans have evolved to much higher moral ideals, socialism will be inevitable. I'm not even sure if that would be strictly socialism, but you know what I mean.

quote: #2, your mountain of scientific evidence is more of a molehill. All I need to do is pick up Scientific American or Discover or National Geographic to see a confirmation of my beliefs on race. Unlike some, I base my beliefs on science. Science is pretty set against the idea of biological race in human beings.

Not at all. Hey, we can argue this till we're blue in the face, but we'd be beating a dead horse. I really think you need to research the other side more thoroughly than you have. The least you could do is admit neither side has presented their case to the satisfaction of the majority of the scientific community.

quote: On the other hand, there laws of this country (existing and previous), as well as many others are proof of my assertion that race is a social concept. If we have to make laws to define what people are, then race cannot be biological. We don't need to define dogs or horses in the law, but we did need to define Blacks, whites, Mexicans, Indians, Chinese, etc. The fact that American Blacks were legally white in apartheid South Africa is the ultimate proof of race as a social concept.

Just because societies make laws based on racial inaccuracies does not mean race has no biological basis. A race can be merely a social construct, yes, but this in no way invalidates the biological fact of it. That's like saying that if the government decided to classify cars and skateboards in the same group it would prove that automobiles are a social construct.

	03-03-2004 02:56									#66
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by Caligastia You only believe this because the foundation of your ideology rests on it. There is a mountain of scientific evidence against you yet you continue in your beliefs because they provide a major justification for socialistic government programs.

Sorry, but Che is entirely right on this, and my ideology doesn't rest on his beliefs. Scientists are clear that there is no such thing as race, except as a social construct. Yes, there are characteristics such as skin color, physical build, hair texture, eye shape, and sickle-cell genes that TEND to associate together in such a way that we can tentatively identify people's "race," but there's no scientific basis for it.

	03-03-2004 03:02									#67
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by debeest Sorry, but Che is entirely right on this, and my ideology doesn't rest on his beliefs. Scientists are clear that there is no such thing as race, except as a social construct. Yes, there are characteristics such as skin color, physical build, hair texture, eye shape, and sickle-cell genes that TEND to associate together in such a way that we can tentatively identify people's "race," but there's no scientific basis for it.

It's unscientific to note common traits and create catagories based on them?

I think your definition of race must be very limiting. You seem to be confusing races and species.

	03-03-2004 03:26									#68
	Support Apolyton

The technical specifications don't matter. The perception of people is that there are different races, and thereby, there are.

	03-03-2004 03:49									#69
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Caligastia Not at all. Hey, we can argue this till we're blue in the face...

Hmm, not familiar with that 'race'- could you elaborate?

	03-03-2004 05:11									#70
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

a group of people who move from europe to africa will change skin color after 30,000 years. does this mean that they have changed race?

	03-03-2004 05:43									#71
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia a group of people who move from europe to africa will change skin color after 30,000 years. does this mean that they have changed race?

It would mean that they have adapted to a new environment and thereby have formed a new Race

	03-03-2004 07:11									#72
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Race does exist. The trouble is racism has so devalued the term that other terms like ethnicity are more useful.

	03-03-2004 07:23									#73
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Very true.

	03-03-2004 07:26									#74
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

IMO "race" plays no part whatsoever. It's all about culture. Where you were born and raised. For example, you're a hick from some forgotten dumpster in Australia? There are good chances you'll be a lot dumber than an average black kid in London. And vice versa.

	03-03-2004 07:27									#75
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Behaviour is affected by more than just environment, you know.

	03-03-2004 07:27									#76
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I agree - it's not a useful term.

	03-03-2004 07:36									#77
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Then again, I reckon race is more widely understood a term than ethnicity.

	03-03-2004 07:36									#78
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse Race does exist. The trouble is racism has so devalued the term that other terms like ethnicity are more useful.

Then you'll have no difficulty giving us a definition of race.

	03-03-2004 07:37									#79
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

No I can't. It's a very vague term. Did I say it was useful?

Go and attack someone who cares.

	03-03-2004 07:48									#80
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Alexander's Horse No I can't. It's a very vague term. Did I say it was useful? Go and attack someone who cares.

A poor retort.

Are your trolling powers waning?

	03-03-2004 07:52									#81
	Re: Does RACE exist? Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia I'm thinking that it doesnt. the use of skin color as a defining trait seems kinda arbitrary - i mean , why not use the color of eyes as a basis of race?

race is arbitrary, at least this is what i learned in my basic intro to sociology class

	03-03-2004 08:14									#82
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

well, there are terms for races.

negroid
caucasoid
mongoloid

note the last one can also be defined as "retarded".

	03-03-2004 08:21									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: A poor retort. Are your trolling powers waning?

You need to club someone over the head to get them to bite. Subtlety is the essence of excellent trolls.

	03-03-2004 10:32									#84
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia i think skin color exists. i just dont see why we race has to be defiend as a difference in skin color. why not choose eye color?

Skin color is a much better indicator than eye color for geographic origin (at least of your ancestors).

	03-03-2004 11:24									#85
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by molly bloom A poor retort. Are your trolling powers waning?

Since you responded to my little troll there like a silly old trout leaping for a fly, I would say not

	03-03-2004 12:07									#87
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Uber KruX physical attributes vary greatly across the gamete of the human population, and tend to cluster in areas, which creates a perception of "races" of people. to deny it's existance is retarded.

One can advance legitimate arguments that race is a social construct based on these physical differences.


To deny the physical differences among different groups of people would be ignorant, but to argue that race is a social construct based on these differences is legitimate, IMO.

	03-03-2004 14:14									#88
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I think the most fair claim is that nationality/ social interactions play a much stronger role than ethnical heritage. ( The ME is a living proof )

	03-03-2004 14:56									#89
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by DataAeolus Actually there have been studies in which children in kindergarten do notice skin color differences and modelling racist behaviors such as rejecting those not of the same skin color. In Kenya, if a mzungu (white person) was to come into an isolated village full of Africans, babies tend to cry, afraid of the white monster coming to eat them.

This could lead to some more interesting Studies:

Take 4 Groups of Babies:

1. A Group of Babies which were raised from Birth on in an environment where it never encountered someone of another Race and also never saw Photos of a Member of another Race
2. A Group of Babies which was raised from Birth on in an Environment, where it either some few times encountered someone of another Race or at least saw Fotos
3. A Baby raised from Birth on in an Environment with mixed Races, but also widespread Racism
4. A Group of Babies raised from Birth on in a environment with mixed Races and all of the Races coexist in Harmony

Now check, for each of these 4 groups of Babies, which social interactions they show, if they suddenly at an age of 3 or 4 years get into a Kindergarten-group with mixed Races (where all Races are treated equally well from the Group-Leader).

	03-03-2004 15:22									#90
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

Darwin observed physical differences among the fauna inhabiting the various separate islands making up the Galapagos and was able to complete and to evidence his thory of evolution as a result.

It was not necessary for him to demonstrate 100% uniformity among the various populations. It sufficed that enough of each population shared a characteristic to be significant and that the characteristics were sufficiently different.

The explanation for one kind of bird having a different bill depending upon what food was available on different islands in a chain is exactly the same reason why people who live through generations in desert conditions develop marginally different physical characteristics to people who live for generations in rain forests.

And differences in physiology result in differences in skill. The musculature of Kenyans and Ethiopians is particularly well adapted to running long distances. The musculature of peoples living in other parts of Africa is particularly well adapted to running fast for short distances. Examine the roll of Olympic champions for the result.

If you make too much of this point and you ally it to the tendency human beings have to prefer the familiar and to be suspicious of the unfamiliar you get racism.

But founding a resistance to racism upon denying the effects of evolution on the human animal is not a good approach. Clarity and openness are the way to challenge such things. Sweeping things under the carpet tends to foster them.

As for using politically correct terms in place of terms which some people find uncomfortable I can see that it may sometimes be polite to do so. But it mostly just trivialises.