 |
| |
|
|
Alexander's Horse
|
 |
Panmunjon, hands up!
Jan 1970
time: 15:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Caligastia
Laz & Horse -
I might ask you the same question. What caused you to come to the conclusion that all racial groups are "the same under the skin"? |
Because everywhere I go, and I have been all over the world, in the most exotic and far flung places, what thrills me is finding the same common humanity in the people that I meet, of every colour, race and creed.
The person you've just met might seem superficially to have nothing in common with you but suddenly you realise you understand each other perfectly and that stranger is just like you. This is a profound truth.
Last edited by Alexander's Horse on 28-05-2005 at 15:10
|
|
| |
|
|
|
child of Thor
|
|
Some people suck, some people don't. Skin colour has never had anything to do with it in my experience(having travelled much of the world).
But one factor could be location.
I've sat down and talked away quite happily for hours with a Chimbu tribesman in the mountains of Papua New Guinea. They have a reputation for being amongst the most ferocious of the papuan tribes.
I found them generous, deep thinking and concerned about the same kind of things i was(and me a 'whitey' from a lower middle class background). Even with the geographical and cultural gulf that lay between us.
On the other hand i find i'm a million miles apart from any urban 'hood', black or white in inner city london. They are more foriegn, and to my mind, more dislikable than a potential man eating stone age man from PNG.
For me many of the differences some people are trying to argue about with realation to race dont add up.
I see the urbanisation of mankind as the source of the problem. I don't think we have evolved to live well in this type of enviroment. For some reasons in large concentrations, mankind(whatever your race) seems to devolve to the worst social behaviours.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
child of Thor
|
|
Indeed Molly Bloom.
Thats pretty much how i experienced it 90% of the time while staying amongst various 'native' people. The middle east was a case in point. It's being demonised now for them all being 'mad mullahs' - not even close to my experience at all.
Still i'm sure if i went to do the same thing now i'd get a different reception, and i wouldn't blame the arabs at all 
As to your other points i can glimpse the truth in them(it's tricky when dealing with ancient history) - and i would hold that all the so called 'racial' problems we experience in our socities today are to do with social conditions. Definatley NOT racial or genetic reasons.
Last edited by child of Thor on 28-05-2005 at 16:55
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
If one says that western modern racism was a predominantly english invention would he be right or wrong?
Last edited by Bereta_Eder on 28-05-2005 at 22:03
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Odin
|
 |
Biology Nerd at Minnesota State University Moorhead
Sep 2000
time: 23:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
This is a quote that fascinates me, on a number of points. I'll elaborate-
I'll guess it's research based on separated twins, raised under different conditions. If so, here are some potential shortfalls-
1- To fully distinguish genetic factors from pre-natal nutritional/stimulational factors, the twins would have had to have been separated from conception, not birth. I'm prepared to stick out my neck right now and suggest that this probably wasn't the case.
2- If it places twins in different social settings, does in ask us to assume that there are convenient sets of behaviours attached to such social settings? Do working class babies have working class behaviours and working class school results? This is a minefield all to itself.
3- In focussing on a search for identicality in behaviour, it may well up up focussing so firmly on a few coincidences that it misses the bigger picture. There are few things as complex as human behaviour and interaction, after all. Identical twins, in my experience, often show marked differences in certain areas of the personalities.
Still, Cal thinks it's proof, so I'll wait for him to post "science" that avoids those pitfalls. |
1. Using many twins reduced the likelihood of that being the case.
2. see 1.
3. Most behavior is a mix of both genentic and enviromental influences, they are not an either/or proposition like some of the nurture fanatics (who tend to be hyper-leftie, politically correct social scientists) and Nature fanatics (which are usually racists and bigots, like Cali) think.
Also, I must correct Cali, it is INTELLIGENCE that is 50% genetics. And there is no evidence that the average of the genetic component differes from one ethnic group to another.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:22
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by paiktis22
If one says that western modern racism was a predominantly english invention would he be right or wrong? |
so tell us how you feel about turks and albanians paik...
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by C0ckney
so tell us how you feel about turks and albanians paik... |
very good cockney, thank you.
however even if one feels "hatred" towards them, it is not because of their "race".
there's a qualitative difference that makes western modern racism what it is. and my question is wether that was a predominantly english invention.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
C0ckney
|
|
Big Up The Macedonian Massive
Apr 2000
time: 05:22
|
|
we're not to blame for your prejudice.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22.
Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
28-05-2005 14:31
Attachment: 
|
