|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... 1
#21843262 - 06/22/15 08:25 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
RANT #1 (approx. 48 HOURS AFTER SHOOTING HIT NEWS)
Quote:
So I just posted this as a response to that recent Jon Stewart clip regarding the SC shooting. I liked it so much, I figured I would put it on my own page. ----------------------------------- Before I start, let me say that I really enjoyed this clip for the most part. especially the beginning. There isn't anything I disagree with, but his commentary was the fruitless banter he was talking against. If we want to turn this into a race issue, or a violence issue, or a gun issue, that is fine... but what good is being done by using these tragedies as a launchpad for angst and grandstanding?
There is a hole in the boat and we are holding debates about the water, not the hole. The water is racism. It is gun control. It is violence in media. The hole is the severity and obsessiveness that our culture conditions into people. It is a lack of philosophy and perception--every generation is more self-absorbed than the next.
The only solution that anyone should be talking about is the overall mentality of our society/culture. There is no silver bullet either; it isn't religion, it isn't regulating inanimate objects and plants, it isn't thought policing, it isn't socioeconomic disparity. It is reversing this trend of increasingly stupid self-absorbed people that now make up an overwhelming majority of the population. When the population gets so detached from reality, you will get a greater area of standard deviation, which means the outliers are going to be greater. We will never see violence or racism eradicated, but what we can do is try to create a more stable society in which the majority is a sane and lucid group, which in turn minimizes the frequency and severity of these statistical outliers.
I honestly want to ask, "what can I do, or should I have done, as a white male, to prevent this?". Should I hold a sandwich board that says "don't be racist" or "don't shoot people"? put some bumper stickers on my car that have feel good messages? This is not an issue of casual racism. No one starts out looking both ways, then tells a racist joke, has a good chuckle then says "lets go shoot some black people". Just like no one reads a few passages from the Quran and volunteers to be fitted with a vest. People have been systematically robbed of logic and reasoning. If all it takes is some moist tits and a beach to sell you a useless product, why is it a shocker when some hick in the woods can start to sound reasonable (to some) about the plight of the white man?
If the issue is just so "right" and simple and logical, we should all be as eloquent as Jon Stewart... but we are not. We need Jon Stewart to walk us through, like a 4 year old, to a fairly simple conclusion. When people stop regurgitating rhetoric and catch phrases and buzzwords; when advertising ceases to work so easily; when people no longer need to have their hand held to reach a fairly simple line of reasoning--that is when there will be fewer people who are so deeply impressed upon by the ravings of a fanatic or fundamentalist and moved so deeply that they commit these atrocities.
If racism and violence are so obviously illogical, then doesn't that seem like the place to start? meaning that if the problem is people not being able to come to a logical conclusion about something without falsely attributing it to "bullies" or "blacks" or "girls that didn't have sex with me", then shouldn't we be trying to re-arm the populace with the tools for proper, autonomous reasoning? When I was 6 I once blamed the hamster running on it's wheel for why I lost to Soda Popinski in Mike tysons punch-out. That is mentally where we are at right now as a nation. "Lost my job? fuck the jews!", "got arrested while doing something illegal? racism", "did bad on a test? must be autistic!"... these are not logical conclusions. Our thought process collectively and individually is pathetic. Has anyone taken a broad look at what the moral of the story is in regards to the shooting reaction? It isn't that violence is wrong, or that all life is sacred...
RANT #2 (approx. 3 days after the SC shooting)
Quote:
Aaaaand the follow through is to try and ban the confederate flag.... yet another continuation of how poor people's conclusion and attribution making process are. I can understand changing road names because it is giving credence to certain historical figures, but vilifying an inanimate object because it has been associated with hate is absurd. If that is the only thing that the flag represented, then maybe there is an argument, but it would still be laughable to try and ban it. How much oppression and senseless death has the american flag flown over throughout the world? How much death and hatred has occurred in the shadow of a christian cross? attacking symbols is quite possibly the most fruitless and futile thing I can think of.
RANT #3 (YESTERDAY)
Quote:
Has anyone taken a broad look at what the moral of the story is in regards to the shooting reaction? It isn't that violence is wrong, or that all life is sacred...It has been a qualitative and quantitative ranking of various "flavors" of hate and violence, rather than rebuking all violence and all hatred. We are trying to say that Hate A, and Violence A, are worse and more despicable than Hate B, and Violence B even when they have the exact same outcomes.
I am watching all this unfold as if someone punched a baby in plain sight of 100 people. Nobody is standing up and saying, "now wait, maybe this guy had a valid reason to punch that baby... maybe that baby deserved to get punched". Nobody said that, because everyone is in total agreement that there is no situation where it is justifiable to punch a baby in the face.
But then, someone says "hey! he punched that baby because it was jewish!". Then a majority of the people become more outraged? like, they had not yet been at 100% outrage after witnessing a baby get punched in the face? As if somehow there are varying degrees of reasons for punching babies in the face.
"well, he was trying to get some sleep on an airplane and the baby kept crying" "oh, still pretty fucked up, but not as fucked up as that guy who punched the baby for being jewish" "no doubt, now THAT guy was REALLY crossing the line!"
But wait, it doesn't stop there. Someone says, "that guy was wearing a Puka shell necklace! which as we all know, is the symbol of douchebaggery. Everyone knows that anyone wearing Puka Shell necklaces in this day and age is a douchebag and probably hates babies! (because what better way to avoid making babies than wearing a Puka Shell necklace?) we should ban Puka Shell necklaces!". So now, instead of talking about minimizing and preventing the occurrences of baby punching, we are talking about banning an inanimate object that is rarely seen to this day, even in New Jersey.
Great reaction America! that'll show those anti-semitic baby punchers! They are going to have to find something new to wear, like chain wallets or some shit.
I was going to post an entirely unique rant that encompassed all of that, but i got lazy and felt that these got the point across.
tl;dr: America is becoming increasingly self-absorbed and incapable of autonomous rational thought. You are stupid for wanting to ban a flag. Don't punch babies or kill people.
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21843380 - 06/22/15 08:48 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I can post a non-unique rant that sums this excellent piece up perfectly:
When are we going to start holding people accountable for THEIR BEHAVIOR AND ACTIONS rather than blaming an ideological position or a group of people of a certain ideology. Or blaming butthurt. Or blaming how a person doesn't feel good about themselves. Etc.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: starfire_xes]
#21843391 - 06/22/15 08:50 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I am really proud of the Baby punching analogy. I think it would be a great little standup bit in a few months when the next tragedy makes everyone forget about banning a flag....
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21843429 - 06/22/15 08:58 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I think it is fairly disgusting how a tragedy isn't about the victims anymore but about how someone can gain a political advantage about it.
President Obama comes off as extremely callous and insensitive when the first thing he does is stand up and give a quick speech about 'this is terrible we need more gun control and theirs too much racism' then heads to the golf course.
What a tasteless display of low-class.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: starfire_xes] 1
#21844733 - 06/23/15 05:00 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said: I can post a non-unique rant that sums this excellent piece up perfectly:
When are we going to start holding people accountable for THEIR BEHAVIOR AND ACTIONS rather than blaming an ideological position or a group of people of a certain ideology. Or blaming butthurt. Or blaming how a person doesn't feel good about themselves. Etc.
When multiple people exhibit the similar terrible behaviors because of the same ideology, it becomes clear that the ideology is correlated and may be causing individuals behaviors and actions. For example, radical Islamic beliefs are at the very least partially to blame for the actions of many terrorists. In this case, rasisct ideologies drove this person to murder and is certainly relevant to the discussion.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Douglas Howard
Stranger
Registered: 03/26/15
Posts: 1,678
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: starfire_xes]
#21844849 - 06/23/15 06:10 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
starfire_xes said: I think it is fairly disgusting how a tragedy isn't about the victims anymore but about how someone can gain a political advantage about it.
President Obama comes off as extremely callous and insensitive when the first thing he does is stand up and give a quick speech about 'this is terrible we need more gun control and theirs too much racism' then heads to the golf course.
What a tasteless display of low-class.
I believe that it isn't about racism, but something else that is effecting these person behaviors; like alcohol for an example; it causes people to do things that they thought that they will never of had done. Like there was a white woman that had ran over a white man that was on his motor cycle kicking his foot on her car door on the freeway; she had gotten upset and chased after him and ran into him on while he was on his bike without thinking about the consequences, how she will end up. Something is causing these imbalance that needs to be look at very carefully.
Abstract While proper brain function requires the complex interaction of chemicals perpetually occupied in purposeful biochemistry, it is well established that certain toxic substances have the potential to disrupt normal brain physiology and to impair neurological homeostasis. As well as headache, cognitive dysfunction, memory disturbance, and other neurological signs and symptoms, disruption of brain function may also manifest as subtle or overt alteration in thoughts, moods, or behaviors. Over the last four decades, there has been the unprecedented development and release of a swelling repertoire of potentially toxic chemicals which have the capability to inflict brain compromise. Although the ability of xenobiotics to induce clinical illness is well established, the expanding public health problem of widespread toxicant exposure in the general population is a relatively new phenomenon that has spawned escalating concern. The emerging area of clinical care involving the assessment and management of accrued toxic substances such as heavy metals, pesticides, plasticizers and other endocrine disrupting or neurotoxic compounds has not been fully appreciated by the medical community and has yet to be incorporated into the clinical practice of many consultants or primary care practitioners. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18621076
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21845282 - 06/23/15 09:38 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
starfire_xes said: I can post a non-unique rant that sums this excellent piece up perfectly:
When are we going to start holding people accountable for THEIR BEHAVIOR AND ACTIONS rather than blaming an ideological position or a group of people of a certain ideology. Or blaming butthurt. Or blaming how a person doesn't feel good about themselves. Etc.
When multiple people exhibit the similar terrible behaviors because of the same ideology, it becomes clear that the ideology is correlated and may be causing individuals behaviors and actions. For example, radical Islamic beliefs are at the very least partially to blame for the actions of many terrorists. In this case, rasisct ideologies drove this person to murder and is certainly relevant to the discussion.
multiple people? there was this and the sikh temple shooting...
and wtf? ideologies are the CAUSE of the violence? how about violent people are the cause of violence...
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21845388 - 06/23/15 10:06 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
starfire_xes said: I can post a non-unique rant that sums this excellent piece up perfectly:
When are we going to start holding people accountable for THEIR BEHAVIOR AND ACTIONS rather than blaming an ideological position or a group of people of a certain ideology. Or blaming butthurt. Or blaming how a person doesn't feel good about themselves. Etc.
When multiple people exhibit the similar terrible behaviors because of the same ideology, it becomes clear that the ideology is correlated and may be causing individuals behaviors and actions. For example, radical Islamic beliefs are at the very least partially to blame for the actions of many terrorists. In this case, rasisct ideologies drove this person to murder and is certainly relevant to the discussion.
multiple people? there was this and the sikh temple shooting...
and wtf? ideologies are the CAUSE of the violence? how about violent people are the cause of violence...
Yes, many people carry out racist actions in varying degrees of extremism.
I did not say ideology was the cause of violence, but I highly doubt there are people who are violent for the sake of being violent. There's always a reason.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21846379 - 06/23/15 03:07 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
people carry out violence for a million reasons, why is racism singled out? especially when it is probably a less frequent reason than money and sex.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21846424 - 06/23/15 03:21 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I didn't single out racism as the cause of violence. In this specific case, racist ideology was the reason that this man chose to act violently. In other cases of violence, the reasons will be different.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21846610 - 06/23/15 04:09 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
right, but why are we treating racism as a much bigger deal than any other reason to shoot people? like it somehow makes the homicide worse?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis] 2
#21846778 - 06/23/15 05:07 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
It doesn't make the victim any more dead, but it is clear that the ideology of racism is involved in a whole lot more murder than, say, the ideology of Buddhism. There's no way to stop violence without looking at the roots of it, and racism, if it isn't a cause, is certainly strongly correlated with violence. I see nothing wrong with having more dialogue and exploration of racism.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21847444 - 06/23/15 07:53 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
He might have acted on racism, but what caused him to act out the violent behavior?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: starfire_xes]
#21847545 - 06/23/15 08:11 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Piss poor upbringing and societal pressures
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Douglas Howard
Stranger
Registered: 03/26/15
Posts: 1,678
Last seen: 7 years, 3 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21847696 - 06/23/15 08:38 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Ritalin use will permanently disqualify your son or daughter from military service in the United States. They treat it like cocaine in the screening process. If you've ever tried it for any reason, regardless of the legality of the situation, you're out. You might not think that this is an issue, but from time to time it comes up in the media. Don't confuse what your child does at the age of six with what he or she will do at three times that age. There are alternatives which work for the vast majority of the people clueful enough to try them. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?RitalinDrug
shooting Every mass shooting over last 20 years has one thing in common... and it's not guns http://www.naturalnews.com/039752_mass_shootings_psychiatric_drugs_antidepressants.html#
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21847722 - 06/23/15 08:44 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Piss poor upbringing and societal pressures
Exactly. And if you consider those as a type of 'mental disturbance or imbalance or disorder' i.e. psychology due to social upbringing, you must add mental illness due to organic disease.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21848089 - 06/23/15 10:10 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: It doesn't make the victim any more dead, but it is clear that the ideology of racism is involved in a whole lot more murder than, say, the ideology of Buddhism. There's no way to stop violence without looking at the roots of it, and racism, if it isn't a cause, is certainly strongly correlated with violence. I see nothing wrong with having more dialogue and exploration of racism.
Quote:
Enlil said: Piss poor upbringing and societal pressures
Well said Enlil, finally something we can agree upon!
I would like to add that I think it is perfectly reasonable to get rid of the confederate flag in public places. The war was won by the Union, and that flag represents a terrible time for America, and some of the more heinous actions of a large portion of our country.
This tragedy is the result of a fascination with guns in the South, and racist ideology. It is disgusting that right-wingers like Rick Santorum are trying to turn themselves into the victim in all of this, as if this kid committed these crimes as a form of hatred toward christianity. He clearly identified with racist idologies such as apartheid and nazism.
There may be instances in which racism is unnecessarily blamed for violence. This is not one of those instances.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21848421 - 06/23/15 11:29 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
you completely missed his Enlil's point.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: starfire_xes]
#21848427 - 06/23/15 11:30 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
No, I didn't.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21855338 - 06/25/15 01:55 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
what flag was flying when the irish were discriminated against in the north east? what flag was flying when the midwest and west coast put japanese in internment camps? what flag was flying at the stonewall riots in greenwich village?
Do not be so naive to think that the North was acting out of compassion for black people. The north was only mildly less racist than the south was.
Here is a quote from a letter Lincoln wrote "If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union."
why is it ok to denigrate the racist by citing "piss poor upbringing" and "societal pressures", when it is that exact type of thinking in regards to other races that makes one a racist?
We are slowly making the thought of racism a crime, and regardless of how you feel about racism, you cannot genuinely advocate punishment for certain thoughts. Actions are the only thing that truly define a person. Waving a flag and saying racial epithets does not make one a racist. Subjugation, disenfranchisement, discrimination-- all actions that should be punishable offenses, regardless of the reason. If someone wants to say "i think we should kill all white people", then that is fine. People in this country should be allowed to freely say and think what they want without reprisal. (and no i do not want to get into the 1st amendment yelling fire in a movie theater bullshit discussion).
We have distorted the definition of racism to include thought. No longer is racism relegated to terrorizing black people by burning crosses in their yard, it is now saying or thinking anything bad about black people. It is perfectly acceptable to say "these stupid, dirt poor, rednecks", but severely taboo to say "these stupid, dirt poor, black people".... what is the fucking difference?
Dylan Roof's racism is the archaic, obsessive type of racism that supports subjugation/disenfranchisement/discrimination and violence... it is not the same flavor of racism (as we define it today) as locking your car door when a thug looking group of black kids get near you, or when you mutter "dumb nigger" under your breath when a black person cuts you off in traffic.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis] 1
#21855361 - 06/25/15 02:00 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Another pointless rant. Who cares what flag was flying? This kid didn't shoot those people because he was raised to have a solid moral compass. Yes, it's upbringing. Yes, it's societal pressure.
Racism, like all -isms, is thought. It's an ideology. It's not conduct. It's not action. It's an ideology, and perhaps even a religion.
Killing a black man isn't racism. Deciding to kill someone because he's black is. The racism precedes the action, and the racism should be vilified and should be discouraged. That doesn't mean the conduct shouldn't be vilified and discouraged as well, though.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21855432 - 06/25/15 02:14 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
hate is hate dude. You cannot qualitatively rank types of hate. Violence and racism are not the same thing. Violence is violence. If Dylan Roof didn't channel his violence through irrationally blaming black people for his shitty lot in life, then he would have channeled it through some other irrational reason for why his life was shitty and shot that group of people.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis] 1
#21855456 - 06/25/15 02:19 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
You'll have to forgive me if I don't trust your crystal ball as much as you do.
It does sound like you're starting to acknowledge that racism is a form of hate. As such, it can absolutely incite passion into people and perhaps push someone that extra step toward violence. Sure, there are plenty of other reasons for violence, but to say that racism doesn't increase violence is absurd beyond words.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855494 - 06/25/15 02:27 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: hate is hate dude. You cannot qualitatively rank types of hate. Violence and racism are not the same thing. Violence is violence. If Dylan Roof didn't channel his violence through irrationally blaming black people for his shitty lot in life, then he would have channeled it through some other irrational reason for why his life was shitty and shot that group of people.
Racism is a precursor to violence. Even the oldschool intellectual brand of eugenics led to violent conclusions of genocide. It is and always has been violent, which is why our society generally denounces racism.
Who's to say that Dylan Roof's life was shitty? (I don't think we can infer so much from his bowl cut alone! ) How can you say he didn't act out these things purely as a physical manifestation of his race-based ideological irrationality.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (06/25/15 02:32 PM)
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21855569 - 06/25/15 02:51 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
yeah racism is hate, or even mild dislike by todays standards. I am considered a racist by todays standards. While I don't dislike people based on the color of their skin, I dislike them based on the toxic aspects of a culture that they choose to express through their demeanor, speech and outward appearance. I have never had any violent thoughts or tendencies born from my immediate dislike of a person who is personally celebrating the toxic aspects of black culture.
I wish you could understand the double standard you are presenting. If the flag is emblematic of a toxic aspect of southern culture and we admonish/insult those who choose to incorporate that into their outward appearance, why is that not a form of racism or at the very least stereotyping (which is basically racism sans race)? you have a set of criteria for hating a group. Criteria A is acceptable, criteria B, is not acceptable and in fact can generate criteria A type hatred... which is acceptable. Do you not get how ridiculously arbitrary that is? Might as well say "its ok to hate people who wear hats, but you shut the fuck up if you hate left handed people".
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis] 1
#21855622 - 06/25/15 03:05 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Do you not get how ridiculously arbitrary that is? Might as well say "its ok to hate people who wear hats, but you shut the fuck up if you hate left handed people".
Really? Is it really that hard to grasp my argument? Am I just saying random insane nonsensical things, as quoted here? Come on.
So, let me get this right, from your argument, one could extrapolate that, given your views, it's just as wrong to hate Nazi's as it is wrong for Nazi's to hate Jews.
Did you actually read what I wrote? Or what Enlil wrote? Both are quite compelling arguments, I think.
Regardless, you say you dislike black culture. I dislike many aspects of black culture also. Shit, I live in little Mexico, and I dislike many aspects of Mexican culture. That is not the same as racism. When you start calling people 'niggers' as you have done, you have crossed into racism. That is based on skin color. If you call white people who embrace black culture 'niggers', then you are using the word outside of its actual application, and you're a fucking idiot. It is a racial slurr. It is racist.
Racism is when you turn someone down for a job because they are black. Or deny them housing or education. When you make them drink at separate fountains, eat at separate tables. When you have a two tier judicial system which makes exceptions for one people based on their skin color, but not the other. When you shoot people for being black/white. If you feel that skin color has any sort of significance regarding the character of a person, their capabilities, their integrity, or their intelligence.
We are not talking about cultural differences. You don't have to glowingly receive all of the cultures of the world. I think most cultural norms are ridiculous, personally, even in white culture.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (06/25/15 03:11 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855748 - 06/25/15 03:43 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
I wish you could understand the double standard you are presenting. If the flag is emblematic of a toxic aspect of southern culture and we admonish/insult those who choose to incorporate that into their outward appearance, why is that not a form of racism or at the very least stereotyping (which is basically racism sans race)?
I never said anything about any flag in this thread or what it means to wear or display it. The confederate flag is a symbol of racism. That doesn't mean that it's always intended as such, but it certainly is a symbol of a racist ideology. Similarly, a cross is a symbol of Christianity although that same symbol is often used for other purposes.
I would never support a ban of any flag under any circumstances.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21855824 - 06/25/15 04:02 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I wouldn't support a ban of the flag either. I don't think it has any place in front of government buildings, or public squares though. Isn't that what this discussion is about?
I may very well be wrong, but I thought what was being discussed was preventing the confederate flag from being displayed outside government institutions, and community owned places like that.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21855841 - 06/25/15 04:07 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
my point is that it is..... ugh I hate trying to give it a qualitative value.... it is "ok" to hate the Nazi's for what they have DONE, not for what they believed or thought.
It is understandable to dislike/hate Dylan Roof for what he has done, not for what you believe his thoughts were.
how can saying a word make you racist? does saying "fuck" make you a nymphomaniac? is there any other word that by saying it makes you something? why does this word have that one power that no other word has? does saying "amen" make you a christian?
how is using a word "less racist" than despising the barrio for being the barrio? you say that uttering a word makes you a racist, then go on to say that subjugation of a group is racist... but your flavor of disdain for mexican-american culture is somehow not racist? why, because you don't call them beaners or wetbacks when they piss you off wasting your time at the Cricket store?
my argument isn't compelling to you because, like most people, you have a zero tolerance policy for anything remotely racist adjacent and refuse to listen to any reasonable argument that doesn't uniformly and unambiguously oppose whatever loose parameters you seem to have for discerning racism.
let me ask you this... have you had any violent tendencies/thoughts against people you perceive as racist? be honest, but would you not applaud if some guy yelling "niggerniggernigger!" got his nose broken? because you really aren't against hate or violence, just a single arbitrary form of hate and violence.
This whole hyper white guilt contest of who can prove to be the most anti-racist is just a form of Neo-McCarthyism--think like we do, or get labeled unfavorably and gtfo.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855850 - 06/25/15 04:09 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Nobody has advocated violence against racists in this thread, but people absolutely should be judged based on their chosen systems of belief.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21855874 - 06/25/15 04:15 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
im asking you to answer a question honestly. if someone was yelling "nigger" in a public place and got punched, would you cheer?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855878 - 06/25/15 04:16 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
or better yet, do you think it is justifiable for someone to punch a presumed racist in the face?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21855898 - 06/25/15 04:23 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
I wish you could understand the double standard you are presenting. If the flag is emblematic of a toxic aspect of southern culture and we admonish/insult those who choose to incorporate that into their outward appearance, why is that not a form of racism or at the very least stereotyping (which is basically racism sans race)?
I never said anything about any flag in this thread or what it means to wear or display it. The confederate flag is a symbol of racism. That doesn't mean that it's always intended as such, but it certainly is a symbol of a racist ideology. Similarly, a cross is a symbol of Christianity although that same symbol is often used for other purposes.
I would never support a ban of any flag under any circumstances.
my point had nothing to do with the abolishment(? since apparently we do not share the same definition of the word "ban") of the flag.
but again, you do not get to emphatically state what a symbolic thing stands for unambiguously and unilaterally. if the flag means racism to you, fine, but jump up your own ass if you think so highly of yourself as to determine what something means to me.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855909 - 06/25/15 04:25 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: im asking you to answer a question honestly. if someone was yelling "nigger" in a public place and got punched, would you cheer?
Absolutely not.
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: or better yet, do you think it is justifiable for someone to punch a presumed racist in the face?
Of course not.
I support a person's right to freedom of speech. If someone wants to be rude in public, let them. Of course, If I saw someone shouting "nigger", I wouldn't think too highly of them and that alone would likely disqualify them from ever being a friend, colleague, or employee of mine.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855942 - 06/25/15 04:33 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
but again, you do not get to emphatically state what a symbolic thing stands for unambiguously and unilaterally. if the flag means racism to you, fine, but jump up your own ass if you think so highly of yourself as to determine what something means to me.
I never said what the flag means. I said what it symbolizes. Those aren't the same thing at all. A symbol is a symbol for a reason, and community standards are what determine what something symbolizes. A swastika symbolizes facism and intolerance. It is absolutely NOT always used to promote either, and has historically been used for much more peaceful purposes....still, whether we like it or not, the swastika symbolizes intolerance.
The confederate flag, to me, conjures images of being a kid and listening to david allen coe and Alabama, and watching dukes of hazard. I don't feel that it's a racist message, even though coe was clearly a racist. Still, I recognize that it symbolizes racism.
Today, we see a lot of people claiming that "nigger" isn't racist because they've invented a new meaning that somehow isn't racist. It is racist. It is a racist word with a racist meaning and a whole lot of racist history behind it. You can scream it and then claim you mean something else, but you always knew or should have known the message you were sending with that word. The confederate flag is the same way. Display it all you want, but don't pretend that a large portion of the population won't see it as a symbol of racial oppression.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855944 - 06/25/15 04:33 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Saying the word 'nigger' is racist because it is a racial slur. How is this so complicated? It is a derogatory term for black people. That word has negative connotations toward a race.
You're mischaracterizing my argument. Subjugation of a group is not always racist. Subjugation of the poor is not racist. It depends on the group. If you are disenfranchising black or non-white people exclusively, you are racist.
Quote:
but your flavor of disdain for mexican-american culture is somehow not racist?
I don't have 'disdain' for Mexican culture. I am just not terribly fond of it. I don't care to immerse myself in their culture. I don't like mariachi bands. There is a serious distinction here. I don't like black music or ebonics either. That doesn't make me racist. It's when people say, as zappa has said to me, that black people are just a more violent people than white folks. They get in more legal trouble because it's in their nature, as black folks, to commit more crimes. Clearly racist.
Quote:
let me ask you this... have you had any violent tendencies/thoughts against people you perceive as racist? be honest, but would you not applaud if some guy yelling "niggerniggernigger!" got his nose broken? because you really aren't against hate or violence, just a single arbitrary form of hate and violence.
I actually am against hate and violence in all of its forms. I feel there is a better way to handle things. Education is one of them. Educated people tend to be less racist, because racism is utter ignorance. I think a guy yelling 'niggerniggernigger' should not be given any respect, as he is clearly a fool. That's about it.
I apologize if you are hurt by the intolerance of intolerance. I think we, as a nation, have seen more than enough pain from racism, and we are no longer willing to stand by and watch any longer. My deepest apologies.
Edited by Bigbadwooof (06/25/15 04:39 PM)
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21855966 - 06/25/15 04:40 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
bullshit....
I'll continue this discussion with someone who isn't playing the role of armchair philosopher.
at least admit this: the overwhelming majority of people would applaud and cheer.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21855985 - 06/25/15 04:43 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I don't know if that's true or not, but that's typical of Americans. The same would be true if a man called a woman a cunt and the woman slapped the man. People would cheer.
Turn the situation around and the woman calls the man an asshole. If he hits her, everyone jumps on his shit.
This is about rooting for the oppressed...for the underdog, as it were. African-Americans have taken a beating, figuratively and literally, so people are going to have less patience for a white guy engaging in more of the same.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21856005 - 06/25/15 04:47 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
so you agree that it is a double standard and deep down it isn't about truly rebuking hate and violence, but rather some fucked up form of vigilante reparations type justice.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856011 - 06/25/15 04:48 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Would you cheer for the guy yelling nigger?
Would you cheer for the guy who punched him?
What's your fucking point? I'll tell you what. If my mother was black, and someone called her a nigger, I'd punch them in the nose myself. It's an abusive word.
I don't know what other brand of philosophy there is, by the way, but I assure you I believe what I say quite powerfully. I don't just ramble nonsense.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856016 - 06/25/15 04:49 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I don't know about "reparations", but certainly it's about some sense of justice, yes.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856027 - 06/25/15 04:51 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
If you think I support black people saying racist things about white people you're dead wrong. There is no double standard here.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21856058 - 06/25/15 04:58 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
but again, you do not get to emphatically state what a symbolic thing stands for unambiguously and unilaterally. if the flag means racism to you, fine, but jump up your own ass if you think so highly of yourself as to determine what something means to me.
I never said what the flag means. I said what it symbolizes. Those aren't the same thing at all. A symbol is a symbol for a reason, and community standards are what determine what something symbolizes. A swastika symbolizes facism and intolerance. It is absolutely NOT always used to promote either, and has historically been used for much more peaceful purposes....still, whether we like it or not, the swastika symbolizes intolerance.
The confederate flag, to me, conjures images of being a kid and listening to david allen coe and Alabama, and watching dukes of hazard. I don't feel that it's a racist message, even though coe was clearly a racist. Still, I recognize that it symbolizes racism.
Today, we see a lot of people claiming that "nigger" isn't racist because they've invented a new meaning that somehow isn't racist. It is racist. It is a racist word with a racist meaning and a whole lot of racist history behind it. You can scream it and then claim you mean something else, but you always knew or should have known the message you were sending with that word. The confederate flag is the same way. Display it all you want, but don't pretend that a large portion of the population won't see it as a symbol of racial oppression.
Coe's drummer is black (and married to a white woman) FYI.
you guys are playing a really weak semantics game here.... hell it isn't even semantics, it is flat out denying part of a definition of a word. what something means is the exact same thing as saying what it symbolizes. It is entirely subjective and people have a right to be deeply offended by it, or get misty-eyed over the greatness of the south or whatever. But you cannot say that one meaning trumps another meaning, or that one persons umbrage trumps another persons pride.
you still haven't answered my question about what other word, with unambiguous meaning, when used makes you a ______-ist?
If someone sees me reading Mein Kampf on a bus and it has a large swastika as the cover, are they correct in assuming that I am a pro-nazi anti-semite racist? or am I just a guy reading a book?
you are trying to make an objective case for a subjective thing.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21856063 - 06/25/15 04:59 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: If you think I support black people saying racist things about white people you're dead wrong. There is no double standard here.
so you are equally outraged when you hear someone say "redneck" or "cracker" as you are when someone says "nigger"?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21856074 - 06/25/15 05:03 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Saying the word 'nigger' is racist because it is a racial slur. How is this so complicated? It is a derogatory term for black people. That word has negative connotations toward a race.
You're mischaracterizing my argument. Subjugation of a group is not always racist. Subjugation of the poor is not racist. It depends on the group. If you are disenfranchising black or non-white people exclusively, you are racist.
again, semantics. no, subjugating poor people is not technically racist, but you know (at least i hope you do) what we are talking about.
Quote:
I don't have 'disdain' for Mexican culture. I am just not terribly fond of it. I don't care to immerse myself in their culture. I don't like mariachi bands. There is a serious distinction here. I don't like black music or ebonics either. That doesn't make me racist. It's when people say, as zappa has said to me, that black people are just a more violent people than white folks. They get in more legal trouble because it's in their nature, as black folks, to commit more crimes. Clearly racist.
black people do commit far more violent crime. how is a fact racist?
Quote:
I actually am against hate and violence in all of its forms.
Quote:
What's your fucking point? I'll tell you what. If my mother was black, and someone called her a nigger, I'd punch them in the nose myself. It's an abusive word.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856080 - 06/25/15 05:04 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
you still haven't answered my question about what other word, with unambiguous meaning, when used makes you a ______-ist?
If someone sees me reading Mein Kampf on a bus and it has a large swastika as the cover, are they correct in assuming that I am a pro-nazi anti-semite racist? or am I just a guy reading a book?
Saying "nigger" doesn't necessarily mean someone is a racist. I don't know of any word that automatically means someone's a racist.
Reading mein kampf doesn't mean you're pro-Nazi.
I think you're making a lot of assumptions here and arguing against strawmen of your own creation.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856138 - 06/25/15 05:20 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Saying nigger doesn't make you a racist. I have said it several times in this discussion. Calling a black person a nigger does.
Quote:
Black people do commit far more violent crime. how is a fact racist?
You are correct. That is an observation of reality. Now, saying that black people are inherently more violent, and that's why they commit more violent crimes, is racist.
Do you believe they commit more violent crimes because they are innately more violent?
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21856147 - 06/25/15 05:23 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
By the way, calling someone a redneck is not the same as calling a black person a nigger. A redneck is an uneducated person who does a bunch of ignorant stupid shit. I could call a backwoods black person a redneck too!
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21856212 - 06/25/15 05:36 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I really just want you guys to admit that it is an irrational over reaction and your views are tantamount to thought policing.
Everyone stereotypes, it is a survival mechanism. If people wearing green scarves keep slapping you in the face, you generally begin to despise and avoid people wearing green scarves. People in the north have the luxury of not being surrounded and confronted with black culture daily. They sit in their gentrified suburbs and know all 3 of the black people in the county and wonder what on earth could possibly make people dislike black people so much, because the huxstables next door are delightful.
If more times than not you were a victim of some crime at the hands of a black person, you stop giving a shit if their feelings are hurt when you clutch your purse tighter as they walk by, or lock the car doors. there are only 2 ways to become racist: taught it, or conditioned. I personally don't know anyone that was raised racist, but I know a shit load of people who became racist after multiple unsavory interactions with various black people... then it gets compounded by the media and then people making them feel ashamed for having a logical reaction to a litany of shitty encounters with black people.
Black people create racist people far more than a backwoods kkk rally.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21856216 - 06/25/15 05:36 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Saying nigger doesn't make you a racist. I have said it several times in this discussion. Calling a black person a nigger does.
Quote:
Black people do commit far more violent crime. how is a fact racist?
You are correct. That is an observation of reality. Now, saying that black people are inherently more violent, and that's why they commit more violent crimes, is racist.
Do you believe they commit more violent crimes because they are innately more violent?
how else would you analyze that data?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21856218 - 06/25/15 05:37 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: By the way, calling someone a redneck is not the same as calling a black person a nigger. A redneck is an uneducated person who does a bunch of ignorant stupid shit. I could call a backwoods black person a redneck too!
thats crazy, because my definition of a nigger is an uneducated person who does a bunch of ignorant stupid shit.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856260 - 06/25/15 05:45 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
You're just making up meanings to words, though. That doesn't change the definition of the word or make it any less racist. You can pretend that "cow" means "chicken", but that doesn't actually change the meaning of the words.
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: I really just want you guys to admit that it is an irrational over reaction and your views are tantamount to thought policing.
There's nothing irrational at all, and policing has nothing to do with it. People are free to think what they want. I am free to think someone is uneducated for being a racist, and he is free to think that black people are inferior. That's how freedom works.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21856328 - 06/25/15 05:56 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
im not sure what the first part of your post is referring to.
so it isn't thought policing, but you think that it stems from a lack of education? just like the other guy said that there needs to be some sort of education that goes on to prevent people from having racist tendencies.
that is thought policing. If you think that we should condition and teach kids at an early age to shape their philosophy in a manner that dissuades people from having a racist ideology, that is thought policing. I am an extremely educated person and I am a racist (by todays popular standards)... how did that happen?
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856393 - 06/25/15 06:11 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: im not sure what the first part of your post is referring to.
so it isn't thought policing, but you think that it stems from a lack of education? just like the other guy said that there needs to be some sort of education that goes on to prevent people from having racist tendencies.
that is thought policing. If you think that we should condition and teach kids at an early age to shape their philosophy in a manner that dissuades people from having a racist ideology, that is thought policing. I am an extremely educated person and I am a racist (by todays popular standards)... how did that happen?
I don't think you're quite understanding me. We'll take your argument about people with green scarves. There is a reason behind everything that people do. If people are wearing green scarves and simultaneously committing crimes regularly, they are likely in a gang. I would investigate further. However, this goes back to something I find myself reiterating quite frequently on this forum. Correlation does not equal causation. The scarves aren't turning people into criminals, that is just irrational. It is something else. We're not suggesting, as you imply, that people be brainwashed. We're suggesting that people be educated. Racism is a form of ignorance. Ignorance stems from lack of education and understanding.
Quote:
how else would you analyze that data?
Really? You seem so much brighter than that. I could go into the whole history of African American people, but I'll just grab a few highlights. If you recall, during Martin Luther King's days, the black people were most certainly not the violent ones. It was the white people perpetuating violence on peaceful people walking down the street. If you recall, it was the white people who enslaved a race and brought them over on boats to do forced labor and be sexually abused by them. You see, if you step back, and put down your ignorance, it becomes clear that there is some other phenomena causing black people to be violent. Or maybe a compounding of things. If we look at white people, we find a correlation between poverty and violence. Take it from there, my friend! ;-)
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856431 - 06/25/15 06:18 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
that is thought policing. If you think that we should condition and teach kids at an early age to shape their philosophy in a manner that dissuades people from having a racist ideology, that is thought policing. I am an extremely educated person and I am a racist (by todays popular standards)... how did that happen?
I said nothing about conditioning anyone. The more educated a person is, the less likely he/she is to have irrational belief systems such as Christianity, racism, conspiracy theories, etc. That has nothing to do with conditioning and everything to do with learning how to think critically.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21856602 - 06/25/15 06:55 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: im not sure what the first part of your post is referring to.
so it isn't thought policing, but you think that it stems from a lack of education? just like the other guy said that there needs to be some sort of education that goes on to prevent people from having racist tendencies.
that is thought policing. If you think that we should condition and teach kids at an early age to shape their philosophy in a manner that dissuades people from having a racist ideology, that is thought policing. I am an extremely educated person and I am a racist (by todays popular standards)... how did that happen?
I don't think you're quite understanding me. We'll take your argument about people with green scarves. There is a reason behind everything that people do. If people are wearing green scarves and simultaneously committing crimes regularly, they are likely in a gang. I would investigate further. However, this goes back to something I find myself reiterating quite frequently on this forum. Correlation does not equal causation. The scarves aren't turning people into criminals, that is just irrational. It is something else.
you miss the point. It is a self preservation mechanism to avoid people wearing green scarves. It is innate in us all. You don't even have to believe the the green scarves are causing people to slap you in the face to still just not risk getting slapped in the face by someone even wearing green anything. Just avoid people wearing scarves and green and probably wont get slapped. It isn't really irrational if you put it back into the context of race...
Quote:
We're not suggesting, as you imply, that people be brainwashed. We're suggesting that people be educated. Racism is a form of ignorance. Ignorance stems from lack of education and understanding.
you keep saying racism is ignorance, but I don't think you guys understand what that word means. especially after I have given some (imo) very rational and informed reasons why people could come to adopt an aversion to black people (or really any group).
Quote:
Quote:
how else would you analyze that data?
Really? You seem so much brighter than that. I could go into the whole history of African American people, but I'll just grab a few highlights. If you recall, during Martin Luther King's days, the black people were most certainly not the violent ones. It was the white people perpetuating violence on peaceful people walking down the street. If you recall, it was the white people who enslaved a race and brought them over on boats to do forced labor and be sexually abused by them. You see, if you step back, and put down your ignorance, it becomes clear that there is some other phenomena causing black people to be violent. Or maybe a compounding of things. If we look at white people, we find a correlation between poverty and violence. Take it from there, my friend! ;-)
this has nothing to do with the fact that black people comprise 14% of the american populace yet account for 30%-50% of individual violent crime categories... what does that have to do with MLK? Even if you were to cite poverty as a contributing factor to violence, no other race is rocking numbers double and triple that of their population. 50% of murders are caused by a group that makes up 14% of the population, while white that make up 63% of the population account for slightly less murders. That basically means that a black person is 5x more likely to murder someone than a white person. I am sure that if you looked at the poorest 14% of white people and added up their murders it is not statistically possible for them to account for as many murders as the black population.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21856613 - 06/25/15 06:57 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
that is thought policing. If you think that we should condition and teach kids at an early age to shape their philosophy in a manner that dissuades people from having a racist ideology, that is thought policing. I am an extremely educated person and I am a racist (by todays popular standards)... how did that happen?
I said nothing about conditioning anyone. The more educated a person is, the less likely he/she is to have irrational belief systems such as Christianity, racism, conspiracy theories, etc. That has nothing to do with conditioning and everything to do with learning how to think critically.
you haven't exactly illustrated how illogical racism is so far.... other than just stating it. either flavor of racism: racial inferiority and disdain.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856655 - 06/25/15 07:05 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
First, an educated person would realize that race is a social construct, not some genetic difference between people. There aren't distinct races at all, but a spectrum of genetic traits. Society has drawn arbitrary lines, but those lines aren't based on anything except historical perceptions based on where, when, and how different people encountered each other.
Given this fact, differentiating between people based on these arbitrarily-drawn social lines is completely irrational.
In addition, you seem to be confusing a cultural bias with a racial bias. It is perfectly rational to form opinions about different cultures and compare those cultures to your own either favorably or unfavorably. For instance, it isn't racist to say that single baby mamas with multiple absent baby daddies are garbage. That's not racist at all. That is judging a cultural phenomenon. Is that cultural phenomenon largely perpetrated by African-Americans? Yes. That doesn't suddenly make it racist, though.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21856710 - 06/25/15 07:19 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Interesting. So you are actually making the argument that black people are inherently more violent in their nature, because they are black. You fail to see my point regarding MLK? That under all of that pressure, while being physically violently oppressed, they did not follow suite? They did not become violent, but they are prone to violent tendencies?
I dunno. This is just getting stupid. Do you really not understand my arguments, or are you just trying to ignore them?
I see what you're saying about the green scarves. It is a good point. Don't you think that if people were educated further about what was going on they might react in a more appropriate manner than avoiding all people with green? Especially if the majority of their encounters were of no consequence? (Unless you're going to make the case that the majority of encounters with black people are negative)
I'm from a big city in Michigan. There are a lot of black folks there. They don't only exist in the South, contrary to what you may have been told. Also, I left it to you to extrapolate, but poverty is only one contributing factor to black violence. There are many more. Do I have to spoon feed it to you?
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21856956 - 06/25/15 08:17 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: First, an educated person would realize that race is a social construct, not some genetic difference between people. There aren't distinct races at all, but a spectrum of genetic traits. Society has drawn arbitrary lines, but those lines aren't based on anything except historical perceptions based on where, when, and how different people encountered each other.
Given this fact, differentiating between people based on these arbitrarily-drawn social lines is completely irrational.
In addition, you seem to be confusing a cultural bias with a racial bias. It is perfectly rational to form opinions about different cultures and compare those cultures to your own either favorably or unfavorably. For instance, it isn't racist to say that single baby mamas with multiple absent baby daddies are garbage. That's not racist at all. That is judging a cultural phenomenon. Is that cultural phenomenon largely perpetrated by African-Americans? Yes. That doesn't suddenly make it racist, though.
what? race is a social construct? what? tell that to sickle cell anemia and diabetes, Im sure the black community would love for them to know. there are large genetic differences across race, and not just skin pigment. (and I'm ignorant?)
And I have been saying since OP almost that cultural bias is now considered a part of the growing umbrella term that is "racism". We are at a point where someone will call you a racist for merely stating statistical facts about black people that aren't favorable. The entire concept of racism is based on genetic superiority, yet no one calls you a racist for saying black people run faster and have bigger dicks on average... because they are like compliments. It all comes back to this underdog complex where hating every other race is understandable/less "wrong" than hating black people. Seriously, go tell a racist mexican/asian or homophobic joke and compare the reaction to telling a racist black joke.
what is irrational is your grade of reprisal and backlash against people who are racist towards black people. None of you are truly anti-racism or anti-hate or anti-violence if you give qualitative rankings based on what race is at the receiving end.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21856999 - 06/25/15 08:27 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Interesting. So you are actually making the argument that black people are inherently more violent in their nature, because they are black. You fail to see my point regarding MLK? That under all of that pressure, while being physically violently oppressed, they did not follow suite? They did not become violent, but they are prone to violent tendencies?
I dunno. This is just getting stupid. Do you really not understand my arguments, or are you just trying to ignore them?
I see what you're saying about the green scarves. It is a good point. Don't you think that if people were educated further about what was going on they might react in a more appropriate manner than avoiding all people with green? Especially if the majority of their encounters were of no consequence? (Unless you're going to make the case that the majority of encounters with black people are negative)
I'm from a big city in Michigan. There are a lot of black folks there. They don't only exist in the South, contrary to what you may have been told. Also, I left it to you to extrapolate, but poverty is only one contributing factor to black violence. There are many more. Do I have to spoon feed it to you?
again, a small sample of a population not becoming violent after being spit on and sprayed with hoses is not counter proof that blacks statistically cause more violence than any other race.
I think if people were better educated then we wouldn't have such a large percentage of the black population being degenerate fuck ups. And I honestly don't think that black people are genetically predisposed to being more violent, but the culture that they ratify and rally behind celebrates violence and is therefor reflected in their behavior. Bottom line, if you want to see less racism towards black people, make better black people or have them assimilate better. I appreciate it when black people celebrate their african heritage, because that culture and identity is far superior to the modern day black american culture.
You want to know who really hates black americans the most? go to africa and find out. I was friends with the nephew of the Nigerian ambassador to the US--hands down the most racist person I have ever met towards black americans.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21857072 - 06/25/15 08:42 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
I think we have to remedy the social circumstances that bear abhorrent tendencies. I don't think the solution is to continue kicking people when they're down and telling them to get up. There is so much at work here, it really isn't something that can be simply described. For instance, many negative cultural tendencies have been passed down through generations of poor upbringing and lack of a decent education. Also, black culture idolizes violent individuals, but that is starting to change, I think.
As I've said before. It's like starting a monopoly game, and having one player jump in the game when all of the property is already owned. Then complaining that they haven't managed to be competitive. Of course this is an incredible simplification. It is a 2 dimensional view of a 3 dimensional problem. It's not just financial, it's education, and cultural. It's also systemic. The judicial system assigns disproportionate punishment for the same crimes to black people. We are seeing an increasing number of examples of racism in law enforcement. It is a complex issue.
A case can easily be made against white people also. There are external factors. Racism is unjustifiable.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21857334 - 06/25/15 09:29 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
what? race is a social construct?
Yup.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21857471 - 06/25/15 09:52 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
what? race is a social construct?
Yup.
i dont think you comprehend what the phrase "social construct" means. Borders, salutations, morality-- all social constructs. observable and genetic delineation is not a construct of society. at all. not in any way. It is buffoonery to say so.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21857666 - 06/25/15 10:31 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: I think we have to remedy the social circumstances that bear abhorrent tendencies. I don't think the solution is to continue kicking people when they're down and telling them to get up. There is so much at work here, it really isn't something that can be simply described. For instance, many negative cultural tendencies have been passed down through generations of poor upbringing and lack of a decent education. Also, black culture idolizes violent individuals, but that is starting to change, I think.
As I've said before. It's like starting a monopoly game, and having one player jump in the game when all of the property is already owned. Then complaining that they haven't managed to be competitive. Of course this is an incredible simplification. It is a 2 dimensional view of a 3 dimensional problem. It's not just financial, it's education, and cultural. It's also systemic. The judicial system assigns disproportionate punishment for the same crimes to black people. We are seeing an increasing number of examples of racism in law enforcement. It is a complex issue.
A case can easily be made against white people also. There are external factors. Racism is unjustifiable.
When a black man is president of the united states, what glass ceiling is there anymore? I will agree that blacks are disproportionately targeted by police authorities, but that comes with the unwillingness to assimilate properly and compounded by actual elevated numbers of crime in black neighborhoods. Don't get mad at the cops for constantly getting calls from black neighborhoods and then discovering a theme or common thread within the criminal element. My car has no bumper stickers, I don't bump loud music, or have flashy rims and severe tint... black culture is about flash and calling attention to yourself. Blacks have collectively conditioned the police to treat them differently. You think police get trained to treat blacks differently, or they learn from experience that pulling over a black person has a great chance to be a volatile situation than pulling over a white person?
everything else you cited such as socioeconomic disparity, education, is bullshit. Blacks are afforded the exact same opportunities that every other person is afforded. There are more scholarships, handouts and special interest groups trying to elevate individual blacks out of their mire of a culture, than there are for a poor white/asian/mexican kid.
The black community, IMO, has actually regressed since the 80's. We haven't helped either with this wave of "moral reparations" towards the black community. Black kids are taught and told from an early age that shit is gonna be tough, everyone is out to get you and see you fail.... and when they do, well it is a self-fulfilling prophecy.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21857802 - 06/25/15 10:58 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
what? race is a social construct?
Yup.
i dont think you comprehend what the phrase "social construct" means. Borders, salutations, morality-- all social constructs. observable and genetic delineation is not a construct of society. at all. not in any way. It is buffoonery to say so.
I didn't expect you to understand, actually. You're one of the uneducated that I've previously spoken about.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21857851 - 06/25/15 11:07 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
what? race is a social construct?
Yup.
i dont think you comprehend what the phrase "social construct" means. Borders, salutations, morality-- all social constructs. observable and genetic delineation is not a construct of society. at all. not in any way. It is buffoonery to say so.
Genetically there is hardly any difference between races. The genetic factors that account for the perceived races are so miniscule they wouldn't even make 1/1000% difference, and even then we all fall somewhere on a spectrum of race. This reminds me of an episode of Maury or some other talk show, where they were testing the genes of a devout racist. They found that he was 6 generations separate from an African tribe! He was white as a sheet. There's really very little genetic difference between human beings and chimps, even!
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (06/25/15 11:08 PM)
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21857909 - 06/25/15 11:18 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Are you arguing that someone shouldn't be able to have bumper stickers, have flashy rims, or tinted windows? I don't do any of these things, but I do enjoy knowing that during my inevitable middle aged break down when I hook up with a cute black girl I'll be able to deck my car out appropriately without being hassled by the police! I would also like to point out that in predominately white neighborhoods, where the drug usage rates are equal, blacks are disproportionately judicialized. I'm sure Enlil can tell you plenty on this subject.
I could go on, but this conversation seems to be winding to a fruitless end.
You can justify racism all you like, it will continue to be unjust. You can try to rebrand it all you like, it's still the same ugly brand.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21857972 - 06/25/15 11:37 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
what? race is a social construct?
Yup.
i dont think you comprehend what the phrase "social construct" means. Borders, salutations, morality-- all social constructs. observable and genetic delineation is not a construct of society. at all. not in any way. It is buffoonery to say so.
I didn't expect you to understand, actually. You're one of the uneducated that I've previously spoken about.
really? you aren't even going to defend your amazingly pathetic position at all, just sling insults?
please, elaborate for me, how race is a social construct. get lucid kid.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21857983 - 06/25/15 11:39 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
We are 'the human race'.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21857998 - 06/25/15 11:42 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Are you arguing that someone shouldn't be able to have bumper stickers, have flashy rims, or tinted windows? I don't do any of these things, but I do enjoy knowing that during my inevitable middle aged break down when I hook up with a cute black girl I'll be able to deck my car out appropriately without being hassled by the police! I would also like to point out that in predominately white neighborhoods, where the drug usage rates are equal, blacks are disproportionately judicialized. I'm sure Enlil can tell you plenty on this subject.
I could go on, but this conversation seems to be winding to a fruitless end.
You can justify racism all you like, it will continue to be unjust. You can try to rebrand it all you like, it's still the same ugly brand.
Its kind of like what chris rock said about ho's. You may not be a ho, but you are wearing a Ho's uniform, so excuse me if I mistook you for a ho.
You are free to get a face tattoo, but don't get mad if people react to you a little differently.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21858006 - 06/25/15 11:44 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: We are 'the human race'.
no, we are human species. this would be like saying all dogs a labradors, which they clearly are not.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21858032 - 06/25/15 11:51 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
what? race is a social construct?
Yup.
i dont think you comprehend what the phrase "social construct" means. Borders, salutations, morality-- all social constructs. observable and genetic delineation is not a construct of society. at all. not in any way. It is buffoonery to say so.
Genetically there is hardly any difference between races. The genetic factors that account for the perceived races are so miniscule they wouldn't even make 1/1000% difference, and even then we all fall somewhere on a spectrum of race. This reminds me of an episode of Maury or some other talk show, where they were testing the genes of a devout racist. They found that he was 6 generations separate from an African tribe! He was white as a sheet. There's really very little genetic difference between human beings and chimps, even!
90% of our genetic information is junk. useless sequences that contain no relevant information due to virions inserting and propagating via our DNA. really only 10% of all our DNA has relevant information.
We share about 50% of our DNA with a banana.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21858247 - 06/26/15 01:06 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
what? race is a social construct?
Yup.
i dont think you comprehend what the phrase "social construct" means. Borders, salutations, morality-- all social constructs. observable and genetic delineation is not a construct of society. at all. not in any way. It is buffoonery to say so.
The reason race is a social construct is that it's not decided along genetic lines as you say. Black people, for example, come from different regions and countries and from genetic lines that haven't crossed in hundreds if not thousands of years. We group them all together because they look somewhat alike, but genetically, it's a huge spectrum of possibilities. The same is true for every other race. The divisions aren't based on genetics, but on appearance, and that's why it's a social construct.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21858698 - 06/26/15 06:35 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
please, elaborate for me, how race is a social construct. get lucid kid.
I'll leave it to the American Anthropological Association:
"the general public have been conditioned to viewing human races as natural and separate divisions within the human species based on visible physical differences. With the vast expansion of scientific knowledge in this century, however, it has become clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups."
"Today scholars in many fields argue that "race" as it is understood in the United States of America was a social mechanism invented during the 18th century to refer to those populations brought together in colonial America"
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21858934 - 06/26/15 08:41 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
again, tell it to all the diseases that affect races distinctly. Diseases have no concept of social constructs and do not adhere to them. You would make a better argument in regards to hutu and tutsi, or sunni and shiite. Those are social constructs where things that dont actually have a decision making process don't somehow magically discriminate.
plus the AAA has about as much objectivity and agenda as fox news. When a respected anthropologist came out with some severe findings that the AAA morally objected to it set out on a witch hunt to try and discredit him.
Quote:
The American Anthropological Association’s investigation of the charges in Darkness in El Dorado (Tierney 2000) found that the late James Neel and Napoleon Chagnon harmed the Yanomami in the course of their research in Venezuela and Brazil, and that Chagnon had violated the ethics code of the association. The association’s inquiry contravened its own policy prohibiting ethics adjudications and was structured not by the standards of an objective investigation but by aspects of contemporary anthropology. Moralized approaches to information and postmodern rejection of objectivity mark the language and methods of the inquiry. The investigating task force did not observe reasonable standards of evidence, the targets of the investigation were not represented, and task force members were compromised by conflicts of interest. The investigation and its collateral activities reflect a culture of accusation and an anthropology uncertain of its ethical or scientific stature
Neel was persecuted by the AAA (which later admitted to) because his work was about the very thing we are talking about: genetic predisposition, which spit in the face of their liberal agenda.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis] 1
#21858966 - 06/26/15 08:50 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
So, you're saying that races are determined by predisposal to particular diseases? That's even more ludicrous than saying they're based on skin color.
White people get sickle cell disease, too. It's a genetic trait. Skin color is a genetic trait. Race isn't a genetic trait. Race is a socially-drawn line, that's it.
I'm not here to educate you, though. Your ideology requires you to find some rational reason that you must be superior to those you've defined as "black". Who am I to stand in the way of your attempt to rationalize the irrational?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21860254 - 06/26/15 02:00 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: So, you're saying that races are determined by predisposal to particular diseases? That's even more ludicrous than saying they're based on skin color.
White people get sickle cell disease, too. It's a genetic trait. Skin color is a genetic trait. Race isn't a genetic trait. Race is a socially-drawn line, that's it.
I'm not here to educate you, though. Your ideology requires you to find some rational reason that you must be superior to those you've defined as "black". Who am I to stand in the way of your attempt to rationalize the irrational?
no, I am saying that it is proof that it isn't a social construct. Also, I have never stated that any race is genetically inferior.
Yes, white people get SCA also, but not nearly at the rate black people do. Even treatments for the same disease can differ based solely on race in some cases. That is objective criteria, not merely a social construct. The HIV virus does not give a shit about social constructs, yet it affects black men differently than everyone else. There is a rare prion disease that only affects Sicilians. Even if you throw out all the genetic dependent diseases, there are still a good deal of other diseases that discriminate based on race.
If it were a completely illusory and made up demarcation, then non-conscious entities would discriminate based on those lines or criteria. it is that simple.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21860327 - 06/26/15 02:18 PM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
If it were a completely illusory and made up demarcation, then non-conscious entities would discriminate based on those lines or criteria. it is that simple.
I think you meant "wouldn't".
And they don't.
Sickle Cell is inherited. It's not based on race. It's based on ancestry. The social construct of race has largely been based on ancestry as well. Of course there would be a correlation between race and any inherited disease.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21863902 - 06/27/15 11:26 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
I never said what the flag means. I said what it symbolizes. Those aren't the same thing at all. A symbol is a symbol for a reason, and community standards are what determine what something symbolizes. A swastika symbolizes facism and intolerance. It is absolutely NOT always used to promote either, and has historically been used for much more peaceful purposes....still, whether we like it or not, the swastika symbolizes intolerance.
By that definition, which I agree with, I think we have what is called 'reverse symbolism' The flag is being used as a symbol to attack a differing ideology, not because of the implied 'racism' that it symbolizes.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: starfire_xes]
#21863931 - 06/27/15 11:31 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
That's true, too. In essence, the flag is being appropriated as a symbol to confront racism. That sounds like a perfect use of it to me.
Racism ultimately will end. It's going to take a long time, of course, but like all irrational belief systems, it will eventually disappear. Today, we know it's absurd to believe that disease is the product of demons possessing a body. Eventually, racism will be universally ridiculed in much the same way.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
starfire_xes
I Am 'They'



Registered: 10/24/09
Posts: 21,590
Loc: Dallas with all the assho...
Last seen: 7 months, 2 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21863940 - 06/27/15 11:33 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
50% agreed. It's not only about attacking racism though. It's about attacking opposing points of view from being expressed, it's about attack different ideologies. 'Racism' is just a buzzword in a lot of cases to influence the Low-Info's/Low IQ'ers.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: starfire_xes]
#21863946 - 06/27/15 11:36 AM (8 years, 7 months ago) |
|
|
Racism is an ideology, so sure...it's about attacking an ideology. I don't know what other ideology you're arguing that it's being used to attack, but I've only seen it recently being used to attack racism.
As far as racism being a buzzword, welcome to the world of politics. You've certainly been an enthusiastic user of other politically charged rhetorical buzzwords yourself. I don't know why you'd expect any different from anyone else.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21870427 - 06/28/15 08:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Racism will only end once biology is no longer an accepted science which will be never.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21870445 - 06/28/15 08:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Biology will eventually be the end of racism, for sure.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21870619 - 06/28/15 09:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Biology will eventually be the end of racism, for sure.
Only if everything we currently know about it is refuted.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21870646 - 06/28/15 09:18 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Not so much. There is no biological foundation for racial lines. Race is a social construct, pure and simple.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21870680 - 06/28/15 09:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Not so much. There is no biological foundation for racial lines. Race is a social construct, pure and simple.
You have no basis for that claim and that is not what modern biology says. environment and genes certainly play a role in race, unless you want to deny evolution as well?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21870739 - 06/28/15 09:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Race is an arbitrary line drawn by society...not some genetic trait or biological difference. I've already cited my basis for that claim, and my claim is not novel.
"Race, the way we have traditionally thought of it, is indeed a social construction. But whether racial groups are purely a biological myth is debatable. There are serious biologists who believe that race is a useful framework. Race may be a biological myth, but there is no unanimous consensus on this topic, and those who dissent from the position that it is a myth are not marginal cranks. 100 years ago almost everyone agreed that race was real, and that the consequences of race entailed that populations should be subject to different standards of treatment. Today almost no one agrees with the proposition that populations should be subject to different standards of treatment (besides racism-countering policies like affirmative action), but there is disagreement on whether race is real or not."
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2012/05/02/human-races-may-have-biological-meaning-but-races-mean-nothing-about-humanity/
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21873471 - 06/29/15 12:35 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
the leading scientists used to debate whether or not the sun revolved around the earth or not too. Just because there isn't widespread agreement on a subject by leading authorities does not make a case for or against anything. It carries about as much weight as 4 out of 5 dentists agreeing colgate is the best brand.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21873500 - 06/29/15 12:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The bottom line is that the notion of race within the human species as a biological matter is no longer widely accepted. On the contrary, most biologists and physical anthropologists recognize race as being a social construct and not a biological trait.
You can disagree, of course, if it serves your bias to do so. I prefer to approach things rationally.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21873582 - 06/29/15 01:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: the leading scientists used to debate whether or not the sun revolved around the earth or not too. Just because there isn't widespread agreement on a subject by leading authorities does not make a case for or against anything. It carries about as much weight as 4 out of 5 dentists agreeing colgate is the best brand.
It carries a whole heck of a lot more weight than some random person on the Internet (you) claiming something that makes no biological sense and providing virtually no evidence for it. I'll stick with the scientific community on this one.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21873599 - 06/29/15 01:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
EnEnlil is trying to establish a scientific consensus where there is none.
enlil is just a guy on the internet.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21873629 - 06/29/15 01:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not believing Enlil (a random person on the Internet), I'm believing the evidence he provided and what I've learned throughout my education. As far as I can tell, there is a consensus that race is a social construct. Can you provide a scientific source that disagrees with that?
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21873719 - 06/29/15 01:50 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: the leading scientists used to debate whether or not the sun revolved around the earth or not too.
Can you please share your source showing it was scientists who made that argument? Or was it religious and/or authority figures?
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21873834 - 06/29/15 02:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: EnEnlil is trying to establish a scientific consensus where there is none.
enlil is just a guy on the internet.
That's not what I'm trying to establish at all. In fact, I specifically quoted a portion of an article that said that there was no unanimous consensus and that there is still a debate even among reputable scientists.
My point isn't that the matter is settled. My position is that race is a social construct, and my position is shared by many, but not all, scientists.
YOU are the one that implied that it would require refuting everything that we know about biology to end racism. This argument is tantamount to a claim that the science of biology has wholly embraced the concept of biologically-based race. That is simply untrue. The truth is that biology has slowly and steadily moved away from such a notion.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21873872 - 06/29/15 02:32 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You can side with the politically motivated "scientists" and ill side with the ones who are not out desperately trying to push their bogus hypotheses because racism.
The science of biology provides evidence which backs up racism, so of course PC people with agendas need to try and push a bogus hypothesis. Its total cognitive dissonance, biologists jist don't want to back up th reasons for racism because it is uncomfortable and socially awkward.
you know foe sure that there are plenty of PC leftards out there who went into biology and then experienced cognitive dissonance when they realized that racism is based in part on scientific evidence, so in orser to eesole their cognitive dissonance in being a biologist, they need to try and revise the science.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21873887 - 06/29/15 02:35 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The trith is in the middle, race is both genetic and ethnic. Its the classic nature/nurture debate.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 19 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21873946 - 06/29/15 02:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
that is thought policing. If you think that we should condition and teach kids at an early age to shape their philosophy in a manner that dissuades people from having a racist ideology, that is thought policing. I am an extremely educated person and I am a racist (by todays popular standards)... how did that happen?
I said nothing about conditioning anyone. The more educated a person is, the less likely he/she is to have irrational belief systems such as Christianity, racism, conspiracy theories, etc. That has nothing to do with conditioning and everything to do with learning how to think critically.
Isn't it also irrational to assume everyone is equal? Isn't it also very irrational to assume every culture is equal in nature?
Where is the critical thinking in believing that every PC thought is just and righteous like some many do? This lack of critical thinking goes across a very large spectrum in my opinion.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: qman]
#21874491 - 06/29/15 05:16 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Of course it's irrational to assume everyone and every culture is equal. This isn't about culture, though. This is about race. Using race to determine anything is irrational since race is a social construct.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21874642 - 06/29/15 05:48 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Not so much. There is no biological foundation for racial lines. Race is a social construct, pure and simple.
There is no biological foundation for different breeds of dogs either, are you going to argue that pitbulls and Pekingese are "social construct"?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21874919 - 06/29/15 06:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I don't have to argue that, but yes...society has arbitrarily divided the species into breeds.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21874983 - 06/29/15 06:57 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: I don't have to argue that, but yes...society has arbitrarily divided the species into breeds.
These different breeds all have different personalities, temperaments, strengths and weaknesses. We as a society did not "arbitrarily" divide them into breeds. We saw and recognized these differences, and we categorized accordingly, despite the fact that there were no strict, biological differences between them. Same deal with the different races of people.
Are you able to tell part a pitbull and a Pekingese? If you can, then congratulation, you just divided these two into two distinct breeds. Did you do so "arbitrarily"? I don't think you did. You make the distinction between them in a logical way (in other words, you saw with your own eyes that these two breeds look different and act different).
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21876786 - 06/30/15 06:53 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: You can side with the politically motivated "scientists" and ill side with the ones who are not out desperately trying to push their bogus hypotheses because racism.
Please help me understand why you believe scientists are politically motivated? If that were really true, climate scientists would have only about 50% believing in man made global warming.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: qman]
#21876812 - 06/30/15 07:03 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
qman said: Isn't it also irrational to assume everyone is equal? Isn't it also very irrational to assume every culture is equal in nature?
That's not what anyone said.
Quote:
qman said: Where is the critical thinking in believing that every PC thought is just and righteous like some many do? This lack of critical thinking goes across a very large spectrum in my opinion.
I don't believe Enlil is the PC police at all; quite the contrary. Neither am I. If you don't believe race is a social construct, don't make up things that don't exist to defend your position.
Is Obama the first black president? Or is he only half black? It's a semantics game, invented by people.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins] 1
#21876902 - 06/30/15 07:43 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: You can side with the politically motivated "scientists" and ill side with the ones who are not out desperately trying to push their bogus hypotheses because racism.
Shins, you're arguing out of both sides of your mouth. First, you argue that the claim that race is a social construct contradicts biology, and now you argue that those same biologists are somehow biased and rendering opinions based on that bias.
If you think the minority of biologists are correct, fine. You're entitled to think that. I certainly don't claim to have all of the answers, and maybe the majority of physical anthropologists and biologists are wrong. I'm never going to be a world-renowned scientist, so I have to go with the available information, and the available information is that those who are experts believe race to be a social construct.
But, if you think your process is any less biased, you're fooling yourself. You are simply disregarding the scientists who disagree with your stated belief. That is certainly not a more effective approach at getting to the truth than my way.
I'm always open to change my position, and if the scientific community shifts the opinion, I'd likely do so.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21876923 - 06/30/15 07:54 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Again with your trying to manufacture consensus where there is none.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21876938 - 06/30/15 07:59 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I never said there was a consensus. I simply said the majority of physical anthropologists and biologists share my opinion. Majority isn't the same a consensus. Consensus requires a strong supermajority, and I've never claimed that.
50 years ago, your opinion would have been the consensus of biologists. That's simply not true anymore. In school, I was taught the old "three race" doctrine, too, but I've had to relearn things as science has discovered more. Eventually, the notion of biological race in humans will become a historical anecdote much like the study of phrenology.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21876945 - 06/30/15 08:02 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No it won't. Get out of here with your PC BS
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21876961 - 06/30/15 08:10 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You can fight the tide of science, but it's going to move forward with or without you. Grow and learn with it, or desperately cling to your outdated notions...I couldn't care less which you choose.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins] 1
#21877003 - 06/30/15 08:31 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: No it won't. Get out of here with your PC BS
What an eloquent rebuttal full of evidence to support your point!
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877378 - 06/30/15 10:16 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Its not science though, its PC politics, trying to call it science is also political nonsense.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21877396 - 06/30/15 10:19 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
With all due respect, have you ever been professionally involved in any field of science?
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877402 - 06/30/15 10:21 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Shins said: No it won't. Get out of here with your PC BS
What an eloquent rebuttal full of evidence to support your point!
Because Enlil has provided so much evidence right? Oh wait he's provided none.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877407 - 06/30/15 10:22 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: With all due respect, have you ever been professionally involved in any field of science?
Irrelevant.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21877417 - 06/30/15 10:25 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Shins said: No it won't. Get out of here with your PC BS
What an eloquent rebuttal full of evidence to support your point!
Because Enlil has provided so much evidence right? Oh wait he's provided none.
Actually, he provided an article that cites studies and researchers stating their findings. Wheres the evidence you provided?
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: With all due respect, have you ever been professionally involved in any field of science?
Irrelevant.
I only ask because you are making a lot of claims about how science works, but it seems you haven't had the experience with science to be accurately making such assumptions.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877433 - 06/30/15 10:30 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I never once talked at all about how science works, nor do you need to be a professional scientist to know scientific method.
its true, even you could learn one day.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21877476 - 06/30/15 10:39 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not talking about the scientific method. I'm talking about all your claims about how politics influences science (see below). Unless you've read may papers, talked to professors, or otherwise kept close tabs on a field, you don't really have the data to say how much politics influences these fields. You just choose not to listen to the results.
Quote:
Shins said: Its not science though, its PC politics, trying to call it science is also political nonsense.
Quote:
You can side with the politically motivated "scientists" and ill side with the ones who are not out desperately trying to push their bogus hypotheses because racism.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877531 - 06/30/15 10:54 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
So you don't think the sciences are ever at all influenced by politics? Or that pseudo science is ever used to try snd back up a political conclusion after the fact? You might be more naive than I thought.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21877549 - 06/30/15 11:00 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I never made any of those claims, nor do I believe them to be true. Before calling me naive, perhaps you should actually read what I write.
You seem to be under the impression that science, or at least certain fields, are entirely or almost entirely controlled by politics. In my experience, this is a massive exaggeration. I'm asking you what you are basing your claims on. Have you ever had any direct experience with science in a professional capacity?
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877592 - 06/30/15 11:12 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I never said entire fields were influenced, although in reality they are, in this case I was saying that the claim that race is a social construct is a politically motivated one.
much of it springs out from backlash against nazis and malicious racists
Edited by Shins (06/30/15 11:35 AM)
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21877606 - 06/30/15 11:16 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Fine. Based on what are you making that claim? Why are the minority of scientists you agree with correct, while the majority are politically motivated?
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877677 - 06/30/15 11:37 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Its not a majority, its a totally fringe claim to say that race is 100% a social construct. Almost no biologists believe that in reality.
Enlil is teting to manufactuee a consensus for political eeasons, which is my entiee point.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins] 1
#21877783 - 06/30/15 12:03 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Let's consult the Encyclopedia Britannica on this one.
Quote:
Genetic studies in the late 20th century refuted the existence of biogenetically distinct races, and scholars now argue that “races” are cultural interventions reflecting specific attitudes and beliefs that were imposed on different populations in the wake of western European conquests beginning in the 15th century.
Quote:
Scientists have known for many decades that there is little correlation between “race,” used in its popular sense, and actual physical variations in the human species. In the United States, for example, the people identified as African Americans do not share a common set of physical characteristics. There is a greater range of skin colours, hair colours and textures, facial features, body sizes, and other physical traits in this category than in any other human aggregate identified as a single race.
Quote:
Although their numbers are dwindling, some scientists continue to believe that it is possible to divide Homo sapiens into discrete populations called races.
To me, that makes it seem like the majority of the scientists and scientific studies agree that race is a social construct. Especially the part saying genetic studies refute the existence of biologically distinct races. Do you disagree?
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21877999 - 06/30/15 12:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: Let's consult the Encyclopedia Britannica on this one.
Quote:
Genetic studies in the late 20th century refuted the existence of biogenetically distinct races, and scholars now argue that “races” are cultural interventions reflecting specific attitudes and beliefs that were imposed on different populations in the wake of western European conquests beginning in the 15th century.
Quote:
Scientists have known for many decades that there is little correlation between “race,” used in its popular sense, and actual physical variations in the human species. In the United States, for example, the people identified as African Americans do not share a common set of physical characteristics. There is a greater range of skin colours, hair colours and textures, facial features, body sizes, and other physical traits in this category than in any other human aggregate identified as a single race.
Quote:
Although their numbers are dwindling, some scientists continue to believe that it is possible to divide Homo sapiens into discrete populations called races.
To me, that makes it seem like the majority of the scientists and scientific studies agree that race is a social construct. Especially the part saying genetic studies refute the existence of biologically distinct races. Do you disagree?
Just because there are no bio-genetically based differences between races, it doesn't mean that races don't exit. Think different breeds of dogs. A pitbull and a Pekingese are different breeds, yet they can still inter-breed. They look and behave differently. Same deal with the different races of humans.
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 12:56 PM)
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21878055 - 06/30/15 01:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21878058 - 06/30/15 01:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I think you're confusing species and race. Species are primarily defined by the ability to interbreed, though other factors are involved too. Races, species, and breeeds, are not the same thing. The whole point I'm making is that races do exist, but in a primarily social context, at least as they're currently defined. This is supported by what I posted above about there being no bio genetically distinct races.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878074 - 06/30/15 01:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(biology)
Nice try, but that article is not about race in the way we've been discussing. The only place humans are even mentioned on the whole Wikipedia page is at the very top where it says "For the anthropological term, see Race (human classification)"
Do you have a response to the Encyclopedia Britannica article I posted above?
EDIT: I found another great quote in that article.
"Because of the overlapping of traits that bear no relationship to one another (such as skin colour and hair texture) and the inability of scientists to cluster peoples into discrete racial packages, modern researchers have concluded that the concept of race has no biological validity."
I'm eagerly awaiting your response.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
Edited by BoldAsLove (06/30/15 01:16 PM)
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878100 - 06/30/15 01:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Shins said: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(biology)
Nice try, but that article is not about race in the way we've been discussing. The only place humans are even mentioned on the whole Wikipedia page is at the very top where it says "For the anthropological term, see Race (human classification)"
Do you have a response to the Encyclopedia Britannica article I posted above?
EDIT: I found another great quote in that article.
"Because of the overlapping of traits that bear no relationship to one another (such as skin colour and hair texture) and the inability of scientists to cluster peoples into discrete racial packages, modern researchers have concluded that the concept of race has no biological validity."
I'm eagerly awaiting your response.
I don't understand why the concept of "race" requires the presence of "biological validity" or whatever it is that you want, in order for it to become "real". When I go outside and I see a person with fair skin, blond hair, and deep-set eyes, I can tell he is a white person. When I see a person with dark skin, nappy hair, flared nostrils, I can tell he is a black person. I know that there is no "biological validity" behind race, but this doesn't make the white person appear less white to me, nor the black person less black. So I really don't see your point.
I am trying to think of an analogy. How about the concept of "human rights". Out in the natural world, there is nothing that physically exists that says it's a "right". Yet we still recognize and acknowledge that we have rights.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21878111 - 06/30/15 01:22 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I'm not arguing that race isn't real. I'm arguing that it's a social construct. A couple of people in this thread have refuted that, and so I'm providing evidence that race is indeed a social construct and not a biological one. That's the argument I'm making.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878135 - 06/30/15 01:28 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: I'm not arguing that race isn't real. I'm arguing that it's a social construct. A couple of people in this thread have refuted that, and so I'm providing evidence that race is indeed a social construct and not a biological one. That's the argument I'm making.
Oh I see. It's just that when people (not just you) say "race is a social construct", it kind of sounds to me like they are trying to say that races aren't real.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878166 - 06/30/15 01:35 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Only a sociologist wohld say race is a social construct. Biologists know that race is inpart classified genetically. Most biologists use race to classify a combination between genetics, adaptioj to environment and adaptation to social structure ( which is in reality the same as environment, its redundant. )
saying that human society is the only thing that has created different gene expressions is just rediculous, and it is a claim that is in conflict with dawrains theory of evolution. Obviously other things, like genes and environment affect the way an animal evolves. Society is not the only environmental infuence. "Race is a social construct" is 100% a political claim in order to deny the uncomfortable facts about the biological differences In people.
After world war two, there was a big push to try an discredit biologic racial difference simply because the nazis used it to justify their actions.
just because nazis and racists used biology and genetics to justify their crimes, does ot mean there is no vality to that science. And accepting reality doesn't make to a nazi or racist either.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878202 - 06/30/15 01:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878203 - 06/30/15 01:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: Only a sociologist wohld say race is a social construct. .
Really? Then why is it that physical anthropologists and biologists largely agree it's a social construct. Are they frauds? Are they not "real" anthropologists? Are they not "real" biologists?
It seems to me that you're claiming that any biologist that thinks race is a social construct is lying or incompetent. Do you have any authority at all to make that claim? Or is this just a gut feeling based on your deeply-seeded beliefs about race?
And from your source:
"Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past"
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878213 - 06/30/15 01:44 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Deeply "seated" beliefs, not "seeded"
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21878218 - 06/30/15 01:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Yeah, the phone doesn't always get that correct.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878246 - 06/30/15 01:51 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
Shins said: Only a sociologist wohld say race is a social construct. .
Really? Then why is it that physical anthropologists and biologists largely agree it's a social construct. Are they frauds? Are they not "real" anthropologists? Are they not "real" biologists?
It seems to me that you're claiming that any biologist that thinks race is a social construct is lying or incompetent. Do you have any authority at all to make that claim? Or is this just a gut feeling based on your deeply-seeded beliefs about race?
And from your source:
"Pure races, in the sense of genetically homogenous populations, do not exist in the human species today, nor is there any evidence that they have ever existed in the past"
They don't agree, you are misinformed or lying. They agree that it is in part a sociak construct, but society is merelt one factor among many.
did I ever claim the existence of "pure" races? Some people are more similar than others however.
Edited by Shins (06/30/15 01:57 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878250 - 06/30/15 01:52 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
So your source doesn't support that biological races exist in humans. Got anything better? Perhaps something from stormfront?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878252 - 06/30/15 01:53 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: Most biologists use race to classify a combination between genetics, adaptioj to environment and adaptation to social structure ( which is in reality the same as environment, its redundant. )
Can you provide a source that shows that most biologists use race to classify genetic differences in humans? Because all the sources provided so far says that isn't true.
Quote:
saying that human society is the only thing that has created different gene expressions is just rediculous, and it is a claim that is in conflict with dawrains theory of evolution. Obviously other things, like genes and environment affect the way an animal evolves. Society is not the only environmental infuence. "Race is a social construct" is 100% a political claim in order to deny the uncomfortable facts about the biological differences In people.
Race is not the same thing as different gene expression. Every human has different gene expression, therefore every human would be a different race. The black and white distinctions of race that are commonly used today (black,white,Asian, etc) are socially determined. Biology has nothing to do with it. Every source provided so far says as much, can you provide evidence to the contrary?]
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878262 - 06/30/15 01:56 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Race is not the same thing as different gene expression. Every human has different gene expression, therefore every human would be a different race. The black and white distinctions of race that are commonly used today (black,white,Asian, etc) are socially determined. Biology has nothing to do with it. Every source provided so far says as much, can you provide evidence to the contrary?]
I think it's more correct to say that races are visually determined. You can look at a (mostly un-mixed) person and tell what race he belongs to. Just by looking.
How does one "socially determine" something, anyway?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878268 - 06/30/15 01:59 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
can't believe you guys are still wasting time talking about this.
Enlil and co. has done nothing to refute the only actual proof or evidence presented in this thread: why does the HIV virus, which is not aware of social constructs, make an observable distinction when infecting different groups of people?
Enlil is basically arguing that the word "Race" is a social construct, he has made no case whatsoever that an objective demarcation doesn't exist.
but here, since "scientists" are so infallible and anything they produce is law...
http://www.world-science.net/exclusives/050128_racefrm.htm
Quote:
The latest research to challenge the race-as-social-construct theory is a study of 3,636 people from across America and Taiwan, led by Neil Risch, then of the Stanford University School of Medicine and now at the University of California at San Francisco.
It found that people’s self-identified race is a nearly perfect indicator of their genetic background, contradicting the race-as-social-construct view, Risch said.
The study’s authors said it was the largest study of its kind. The participants identified themselves as either white, African-American, East Asian or Hispanic. For each participant, the researchers examined 326 DNA regions that tend to vary between people. These regions are not necessarily within functioning genes—some regions of the genome have no known use—but are simply genetic signposts that come in a variety of forms at the same place.
Without knowing how the participants had identified themselves, Risch and his team ran the results through a computer program that grouped individuals according to patterns of the 326 signposts. This analysis could have resulted in any number of different clusters, but only four clear groups turned up. And in each case the individuals within those clusters all fell within the same self-identified racial group.
“This work comes on the heels of several contradictory studies about the genetic basis of race. Some found that race is a social construct with no genetic basis while others suggested that clear genetic differences exist between people of different races,” a press release from Stanford said.
“What makes the current study, published in the February issue of the American Journal of Human Genetics, more conclusive is its size. The study is by far the largest, consisting of 3,636 people who all identified themselves as either white, African-American, East Asian or Hispanic. Of these, only five individuals had DNA that matched an ethnic group different than the box they checked at the beginning of the study.”
it also addresses another point trying to be made in this thread that politics hold little to no sway over the scientific community.
Quote:
Several scientists who have supported the view of race as a social construct did not respond to requests for comment on the new studies, including officials from the American Anthropological Association and the author of the New England Journal editorial, Robert S. Schwartz.
also, there are a great deal of scientists that claim climate change doesn't exist.
but here is more....
a very well written article. Very long. http://www.unz.com/runz/does-race-exist-do-hills-exist/
Quote:
All too many socially-conditioned Americans have absorbed the Lewontin-Gould mantra that “Race Does Not Exist” which from a scientific perspective is roughly similar to claiming that “Teeth Do Not Exist” or perhaps “Hills Do Not Exist,” with the latter being an especially good parallel. It is perfectly correct that the notion of “hill” is ill-defined and vague—what precise height distinguishes a pile of dirt from a hill and a hill from a mountain?—but nevertheless denying the reality or usefulness of such a concept would be an absurdity. Similarly, the notion of distinct human races—genetic clusters across a wide variety of scales and degrees of fuzziness—is an obviously useful and correct organizing principle, and one which was probably accepted without question by everyone in the history of the world except for deluded Americans of the last fifty years.
If you want to argue the semantics of whether or not "Race" is truly synonymous with "ethnicity", fine. This would be the same as claiming there is no validity for observable distinctions if they do not meet the threshold to become a new species. Just because we DONT have a "socially constructed" word or classification for something doesn't invalidate an observation. If there were no such classification beyond Kingdoms would it be fair to assume that there is no validation to the observable distinction between humans and any other vertebrate?
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878272 - 06/30/15 02:00 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: So your source doesn't support that biological races exist in humans. Got anything better? Perhaps something from stormfront?
Nobody ever claimed races were purely genetic.
You however claimed that biology plays no part in classifyimg race.
I claim that biology and society are BOTH factors in classifying race, which is what most scientists also say.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878287 - 06/30/15 02:03 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
That's what socially determined means. We've learned in our culture that people that look a certain way fall into distinct and broad categories. These categories are associated with certain stereotypes. What this whole debate has been about, is that these broad categories don't carry much, or any, biological significance. They are determined by what we've learned in our culture about how to view and group people.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878301 - 06/30/15 02:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The word "race" in biology has a meaning, but that meaning simply doesn't apply to humans. When we use that word to define humans, we're using a socially constructed concept that has nothing to do with the biological meaning of the word. They're two completely different things.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878307 - 06/30/15 02:09 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
The debate started when I claimed that different genes and gene expressions can affect the propensity of certain traits and behaviour, namely criminal activity.
then the PC police came to try and dispute genetics and evolution by claiming its all social or because od poverty, which is total BS.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878311 - 06/30/15 02:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: The word "race" in biology has a meaning, but that meaning simply doesn't apply to humans. When we use that word to define humans, we're using a socially constructed concept that has nothing to do with the biological meaning of the word. They're two completely different things.
Humans are not separate from the rest of earths creatures and do not enjoy special classification.
|
qman
Stranger

Registered: 12/06/06
Posts: 34,927
Last seen: 19 minutes, 55 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878325 - 06/30/15 02:14 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: The debate started when I claimed that different genes and gene expressions can affect the propensity of certain traits and behaviour, namely criminal activity.
then the PC police came to try and dispute genetics and evolution by claiming its all social or because od poverty, which is total BS.
The biologists use the word "little" genetic differences between races, which as we know is a relative term.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878327 - 06/30/15 02:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said:
Humans are not separate from the rest of earths creatures and do not enjoy special classification.
Nobody said anything about special classification. Some species have different races, others don't. Humans is a species that doesn't. Your source confirms this.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878347 - 06/30/15 02:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: That's what socially determined means. We've learned in our culture that people that look a certain way fall into distinct and broad categories. These categories are associated with certain stereotypes. What this whole debate has been about, is that these broad categories don't carry much, or any, biological significance. They are determined by what we've learned in our culture about how to view and group people.
By "observable distinction" I don't just mean superficial features. If the HIV virus affects one certain group of people differently than all other groups of people, that is an observable distinction not based on social construct. Ipso facto bruh.
If race was a social construct, then things that are not aware of such intangible stuff, should not make a similar distinction. If race was a social construct, then there would not be treatments that are based upon a racial distinction that have more favorable results for that group.
You guys are basically arguing against that. Either you think virions and bacteria are aware of social constructs, or you think that particular scientific proof is wrong. Either way, you are mentally deficient.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878358 - 06/30/15 02:25 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Your argument is the equivalent of "Black people are black, and Asians have eyes that are shaped differently. These are genetic traits, so race is genetic and therefore not a social construct"
Of course, you're missing the whole point. Race is socially constructed and the lines are drawn based on visible phenotypes that are related to genotypes. Of course the races share genetic traits.
That isn't what the word "race" means in biology, though. Under the biological definition of race, humans do not have races.
Under the socially defined term, "race", sure...humans have races.
This is why we say that race is a social construct...at least as it is applied to humans.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878419 - 06/30/15 02:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Your argument is the equivalent of "Black people are black, and Asians have eyes that are shaped differently. These are genetic traits, so race is genetic and therefore not a social construct"
No, that isn't what I have been saying at all. If virions adhered to social constructs, then they would not kill people, because the concept of murder being wrong or bad is a social construct. You are completely unwilling to even acknowledge this argument.
Quote:
Of course, you're missing the whole point. Race is socially constructed and the lines are drawn based on visible phenotypes that are related to genotypes. Of course the races share genetic traits.
That isn't what the word "race" means in biology, though. Under the biological definition of race, humans do not have races.
Under the socially defined term, "race", sure...humans have races.
This is why we say that race is a social construct...at least as it is applied to humans.
yes, under the biological definition of "race", humans have race. You keep wanting to back-peddle into semantics and you can't even do that properly. All you have so far is trying to poorly cite semantics and "scientists said so!".
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878428 - 06/30/15 02:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You are getting dangerously close to just saying "nothing is real! everything is a construct!".
take it to the spirituality forum if that is where you have to take arguments to slowly creep away from admitting you are wrong and defeated.
Edited by SneezingPenis (06/30/15 02:47 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878463 - 06/30/15 02:56 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
There's nothing to admit. Human race is a social construct. I've cited sources, shins has too. You can plug your ears and scream "nanny nanny" all you want, but it doesn't change the basic fact.
Sorry that it doesn't fit your worldview.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878509 - 06/30/15 03:05 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
you have cited a consensus opinion from a "scientific" organization that has a well documented history of pushing an unscientific agenda. I have cited studies and presented an ipso facto argument that you still have not even acknowledged, let alone attempt to refute.
All you keep saying is "racism is a social construct" as if saying it more will make it any more true, or become a logical argument. Until you can tell me why non-sentient entities would act in accordance with illusory and abstract concepts, you have lost this argument.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878677 - 06/30/15 03:37 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Lol, you have just repeatedly said that because diseases act differently in different races, that race is a biological reality. That's argument completely misses the whole core of what we're discussing.
We're discussing race in humans. My position is that the biological notion of race doesn't apply to the human species. That leaves only a socially constructed version. It's really a simple position, actually.
Your argument is that races have certain genetic traits.
Those aren't contradictory positions at all.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis] 1
#21878735 - 06/30/15 03:47 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: That's what socially determined means. We've learned in our culture that people that look a certain way fall into distinct and broad categories. These categories are associated with certain stereotypes. What this whole debate has been about, is that these broad categories don't carry much, or any, biological significance. They are determined by what we've learned in our culture about how to view and group people.
By "observable distinction" I don't just mean superficial features. If the HIV virus affects one certain group of people differently than all other groups of people, that is an observable distinction not based on social construct. Ipso facto bruh.
If race was a social construct, then things that are not aware of such intangible stuff, should not make a similar distinction. If race was a social construct, then there would not be treatments that are based upon a racial distinction that have more favorable results for that group.
You guys are basically arguing against that. Either you think virions and bacteria are aware of social constructs, or you think that particular scientific proof is wrong. Either way, you are mentally deficient.
Your whole bit about viruses, bacteria, and disease that you've been going on about is irrelevant to this debate, and here's why. They don't affect racial groups indiscriminately. Sickle cell is not a disease that affects only black people. It's a disease that is more likely to occur in black people with lineages tracing back to maleria infested regions. A white person and a black person who doesn't have ancestry in maleria infected regions have the same chance of contracting sickle cell, even if they are different races. When someone says black, they don't differntiate between black people from the jungle and black people from the desert. They couldn't possibly know. This is why biology is irrelevant to determining the races as used today. The races are too broadly defined.
Also, for the record, the sources that have been provided, like the Encylcopedia Britannica, are typically viewed as very reputable. Those sources agree with the position that race Is social and not biological. Unless you have a source to counter it, you're just stating your opinion. Which is fine, but your opinion is also counter to the scientific community and results on this one, and you haven't provided much to back it up.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878822 - 06/30/15 04:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: The debate started when I claimed that different genes and gene expressions can affect the propensity of certain traits and behaviour, namely criminal activity.
then the PC police came to try and dispute genetics and evolution by claiming its all social or because od poverty, which is total BS.
Genetics might affect behavior, sure, but is there any evidence to say it does on a race-wide level? Besides, do you have any evidence to counter the Encylocpedia Brit. when it says that there is no biogenetic basis for race? Because, without those two things, you've got nothing to build your argument on.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878840 - 06/30/15 04:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Lol, you have just repeatedly said that because diseases act differently in different races, that race is a biological reality. That's argument completely misses the whole core of what we're discussing.
We're discussing race in humans. My position is that the biological notion of race doesn't apply to the human species. That leaves only a socially constructed version. It's really a simple position, actually.
Your argument is that races have certain genetic traits.
Those aren't contradictory positions at all.
why wouldn't the biological definition of race apply to humans?
Quote:
In biological classification, a race is an informal taxonomic rank, below the level of a species. It is used as a higher rank than strain, with several strains making up one race. Races may be distinct phenotypic populations within the same species, or they may be defined in other ways.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878854 - 06/30/15 04:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Its not only virii that affect different people differently, behavioral traits do too. Jist like how dogs, even within the same breed are selectively bred for their expressions of temperament.
Just like dogs, different human genetic ezpressions also ezpress different temperaments.
Humans are not magically exempt from this.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis] 1
#21878862 - 06/30/15 04:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
It does apply. But there are no races of that kind defined for humans. There is the socially defined race, but not the biologically defined.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878875 - 06/30/15 04:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Shins said: The debate started when I claimed that different genes and gene expressions can affect the propensity of certain traits and behaviour, namely criminal activity.
then the PC police came to try and dispute genetics and evolution by claiming its all social or because od poverty, which is total BS.
Genetics might affect behavior, sure, but is there any evidence to say it does on a race-wide level? Besides, do you have any evidence to counter the Encylocpedia Brit. when it says that there is no biogenetic basis for race? Because, without those two things, you've got nothing to build your argument on.
Genetics definitely affect behavior, no maybe about it. Races are categorized partially by genetics.
Encyclopedia brit is inaccurate.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878879 - 06/30/15 04:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
why wouldn't the biological definition of race apply to humans?
No need to reinvent the wheel here:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: It does apply. But there are no races of that kind defined for humans. There is the socially defined race, but not the biologically defined.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878883 - 06/30/15 04:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: Its not only virii that affect different people differently, behavioral traits do too. Jist like how dogs, even within the same breed are selectively bred for their expressions of temperament.
Just like dogs, different human genetic ezpressions also ezpress different temperaments.
Humans are not magically exempt from this.
I completely agree that genetics could affect behavior. But you are implying that it happens on a race-wide basis (eg blacks are disposed to certain temperament). Do you have any evidence to support this notion, or are you just making assumptions?
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878889 - 06/30/15 04:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said:
Encyclopedia brit is inaccurate.
Everybody's inaccurate except you, of course. Even your own source must be inaccurate insofar as it supports our position.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878894 - 06/30/15 04:21 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: It does apply. But there are no races of that kind defined for humans. There is the socially defined race, but not the biologically defined.
You're a broken record.
there are races defined like that.
no dog is technically a "purebred" they are all differing levels of mutt,
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878902 - 06/30/15 04:23 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Your own source completely debunked the comparison to dog breeds, BTW:
"Such populations do not correspond to breeds of domestic animals, which have been produced by artificial selection over many generations for specific human purposes."
Do you even read your own sources? Or do you just read a sentence that sounds good and link it?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21878912 - 06/30/15 04:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Shins said: The debate started when I claimed that different genes and gene expressions can affect the propensity of certain traits and behaviour, namely criminal activity.
then the PC police came to try and dispute genetics and evolution by claiming its all social or because od poverty, which is total BS.
Genetics might affect behavior, sure, but is there any evidence to say it does on a race-wide level? Besides, do you have any evidence to counter the Encylocpedia Brit. when it says that there is no biogenetic basis for race? Because, without those two things, you've got nothing to build your argument on.
Genetics definitely affect behavior, no maybe about it. Races are categorized partially by genetics.
Encyclopedia brit is inaccurate.
The Encyclopedia Brit. is generally regarded as well researched and accurate. So as opposed to just saying "no, it's wrong", why don't you provide some evidence to support your case?
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: It does apply. But there are no races of that kind defined for humans. There is the socially defined race, but not the biologically defined.
You're a broken record.
there are races defined like that.
no dog is technically a "purebred" they are all differing levels of mutt,
There are not taxonomical races defined for humans. That's a fact. There is one species and sub species of human (Homo sapiens sapiens) and it has not been further categorized.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878921 - 06/30/15 04:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Your whole bit about viruses, bacteria, and disease that you've been going on about is irrelevant to this debate, and here's why. They don't affect racial groups indiscriminately.
Either you didn't mean to say this, or you are agreeing with me without knowing it. Maybe you meant discriminately? Because that is what they do.
Quote:
Sickle cell is not a disease that affects only black people. It's a disease that is more likely to occur in black people with lineages tracing back to maleria infested regions. A white person and a black person who doesn't have ancestry in maleria infected regions have the same chance of contracting sickle cell, even if they are different races.
You have no clue what you are talking about. You are seriously talking out your ass. SCA is not contractable and a white person does not have the same chance of having it as a black person, regardless of malaria stricken regional ancestry. Quit spouting shit you have no clue about.
Quote:
When someone says black, they don't differntiate between black people from the jungle and black people from the desert. They couldn't possibly know. This is why biology is irrelevant to determining the races as used today. The races are too broadly defined.
If your argument is that races are too broadly defined, that is a completely different discussion. Also, as we are trying to define race is not whether there is a distinction between a black person from the jungle and a black person from the desert. You aren't helping your position. When someone refers to "the black race" they aren't simply saying "all the black colored people that live in urban areas" without expressly stating otherwise... they are meaning "all black people".
Quote:
Also, for the record, the sources that have been provided, like the Encylcopedia Britannica, are typically viewed as very reputable. Those sources agree with the position that race Is social and not biological. Unless you have a source to counter it, you're just stating your opinion. Which is fine, but your opinion is also counter to the scientific community and results on this one, and you haven't provided much to back it up.
your citation from EB simply states that "scholars are arguing" about it and that in favor of being PC, scientists are shirking away from using words like "race" because people call them racists for pointing out any distinction. And I did give sources... are you reading this thread? I am the only one that has cited an ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC STUDY. all you guys are doing is regurgitating scientists OPINIONS.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21878930 - 06/30/15 04:28 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Shins said: Its not only virii that affect different people differently, behavioral traits do too. Jist like how dogs, even within the same breed are selectively bred for their expressions of temperament.
Just like dogs, different human genetic ezpressions also ezpress different temperaments.
Humans are not magically exempt from this.
I completely agree that genetics could affect behavior. But you are implying that it happens on a race-wide basis (eg blacks are disposed to certain temperament). Do you have any evidence to support this notion, or are you just making assumptions?
In general, blacks posess certain unique genes in common on average.
do the math.
if genetics affect behaviour, and certain groups of people have different genes than othera, than....?
could different groups behave differently because od those unique genes?
just admit the possibility at least.
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878939 - 06/30/15 04:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Your own source completely debunked the comparison to dog breeds, BTW:
"Such populations do not correspond to breeds of domestic animals, which have been produced by artificial selection over many generations for specific human purposes."
Do you even read your own sources? Or do you just read a sentence that sounds good and link it?
I was not compating them in the same way.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21878943 - 06/30/15 04:30 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
why wouldn't the biological definition of race apply to humans?
No need to reinvent the wheel here:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said: It does apply. But there are no races of that kind defined for humans. There is the socially defined race, but not the biologically defined.
And again, were it not relevant to objective diagnostic criteria in medicine there would be no point to fill out a part of the medical form for race. It has been defined biologically, it is currently being used as a tool, therefor it is not merely a social construct. Why are you incapable of linking these two things? all you are saying is "it isn't" which isn't an argument at all.
And you still refuse to acknowledge it.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878959 - 06/30/15 04:34 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
are you guys seriously saying that because the chart on the wall in school that shows the Taxonomy Tree doesn't have under "Homo Sapiens" the terms "Homo Sapien Negrus" and "Homo Sapien anglicus" that it isn't a valid distinction with valid criteria?
I really hope that isn't your position at this point....
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21878990 - 06/30/15 04:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Either you didn't mean to say this, or you are agreeing with me without knowing it. Maybe you meant discriminately? Because that is what they do.
Yes, I'm on my phone and often make typos. And that is not what they do. They affect people with susceptibilities, but not entire racial groups.
Quote:
You have no clue what you are talking about. You are seriously talking out your ass. SCA is not contractable and a white person does not have the same chance of having it as a black person, regardless of malaria stricken regional ancestry. Quit spouting shit you have no clue about.
Do you know why sickle cell is more common in black people? It's because the sickle cell phenotype provides an immunity to malaria. So, in maleria infested regions, it is selected for. In other regions it isn't. The people in malaria regions tend to be black. If someone comes from a lineage where maleria was never prevalent, then sickle cell never became more likely in their lineage. The color of the skin is irrelevant. So once again, the chance of developing sickle cell is essentially the same amongst all people whose lineages were never exposed to large amounts of maleria, regardless of skin color.
Quote:
If your argument is that races are too broadly defined, that is a completely different discussion. Also, as we are trying to define race is not whether there is a distinction between a black person from the jungle and a black person from the desert. You aren't helping your position. When someone refers to "the black race" they aren't simply saying "all the black colored people that live in urban areas" without expressly stating otherwise... they are meaning "all black people".
The desert jungle distinction is relevant to sickle cell, see above. And I'm saying that race, as defined socially, is to broad to have any meaning biologically.
Quote:
your citation from EB simply states that "scholars are arguing" about it and that in favor of being PC, scientists are shirking away from using words like "race" because people call them racists for pointing out any distinction. And I did give sources... are you reading this thread? I am the only one that has cited an ACTUAL SCIENTIFIC STUDY. all you guys are doing is regurgitating scientists OPINIONS.
I missed the study you posted, I'm on my phone, so that tends to happen. If you link it again, I'd be happy to read it.
Actually, EB said this:
"Quote:
Genetic studies in the late 20th century refuted the existence of biogenetically distinct races, and scholars now argue that “races” are cultural interventions reflecting specific attitudes and beliefs that were imposed on different populations in the wake of western European conquests beginning in the 15th century."
""Because of the overlapping of traits that bear no relationship to one another (such as skin colour and hair texture) and the inability of scientists to cluster peoples into discrete racial packages, modern researchers have concluded that the concept of race has no biological validity.""
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21879005 - 06/30/15 04:44 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said:
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Shins said: Its not only virii that affect different people differently, behavioral traits do too. Jist like how dogs, even within the same breed are selectively bred for their expressions of temperament.
Just like dogs, different human genetic ezpressions also ezpress different temperaments.
Humans are not magically exempt from this.
I completely agree that genetics could affect behavior. But you are implying that it happens on a race-wide basis (eg blacks are disposed to certain temperament). Do you have any evidence to support this notion, or are you just making assumptions?
In general, blacks posess certain unique genes in common on average.
do the math.
if genetics affect behaviour, and certain groups of people have different genes than othera, than....?
could different groups behave differently because od those unique genes?
just admit the possibility at least.
It is absolutely possible. I don't think it is likely, given that there is no genetic basis for defining race and because I don't think a link between genetics and behavior is likely to be very cut and dry. But it is certainly possible.
Now, do you have any evidence to support that it may be true, or were you making assumptions?
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21879016 - 06/30/15 04:46 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: are you guys seriously saying that because the chart on the wall in school that shows the Taxonomy Tree doesn't have under "Homo Sapiens" the terms "Homo Sapien Negrus" and "Homo Sapien anglicus" that it isn't a valid distinction with valid criteria?
I really hope that isn't your position at this point....
I can't remember who cited the Wikipedia page on Race (biology), but that is exactly what it refers to. A taxonomic distinction below species. Those currently do not exist for humans, there is only Homo sapiens sapiens. Therefore, that page is irrelevant to a discussion about humans.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21879163 - 06/30/15 05:17 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Either you didn't mean to say this, or you are agreeing with me without knowing it. Maybe you meant discriminately? Because that is what they do.
Yes, I'm on my phone and often make typos. And that is not what they do. They affect people with susceptibilities, but not entire racial groups.
Quote:
You have no clue what you are talking about. You are seriously talking out your ass. SCA is not contractable and a white person does not have the same chance of having it as a black person, regardless of malaria stricken regional ancestry. Quit spouting shit you have no clue about.
Do you know why sickle cell is more common in black people? It's because the sickle cell phenotype provides an immunity to malaria. So, in maleria infested regions, it is selected for. In other regions it isn't. The people in malaria regions tend to be black. If someone comes from a lineage where maleria was never prevalent, then sickle cell never became more likely in their lineage. The color of the skin is irrelevant. So once again, the chance of developing sickle cell is essentially the same amongst all people whose lineages were never exposed to large amounts of maleria, regardless of skin color.
Again, that is supporting my argument. Race is developed by regional ancestry. You can thank nationalism, incest, lack of feasible transportation, tribalism and a handful of other social constructs that created regional distinctions... meaning people were born in a place, fucked in that same place, had babies in that same place, and died in that same place. Even nomadic tribes kept their lineage confined to their own "socially constructed" kind. You could make an argument that the lines of the divisions of races are blurring and will continue to do so with the advent of greater transportation. The further a person can freely move from their place of origin will decrease the rigidity of observable distinction. Race will eventually become more of a social or cultural distinction and less of an objective distinction based on genetics.
Quote:
Actually, EB said this:
"Quote:
Genetic studies in the late 20th century refuted the existence of biogenetically distinct races, and scholars now argue that “races” are cultural interventions reflecting specific attitudes and beliefs that were imposed on different populations in the wake of western European conquests beginning in the 15th century."
""Because of the overlapping of traits that bear no relationship to one another (such as skin colour and hair texture) and the inability of scientists to cluster peoples into discrete racial packages, modern researchers have concluded that the concept of race has no biological validity.""
I would love to see what scientific studies really refuted it... but I do like this: "the inability of scientists to cluster peoples into discrete racial packages"... It isn't an inability, but rather a social backlash against doing any studies that do use race as a distinction. Freakonomics writers got death threats for simply stating that crime dropped in the early 90's due to Roe V Wade 18 years prior.... basically saying that all the would be criminals from low socioeconomic parents were exterminated... then a lot of people read that as "black kids" and got angry.
But still, your EB quote really doesn't say anything other than basically "It has become too touchy of a subject for scientists to even acknowledge race". Doctors are scientists, and they utilize racial distinction as a diagnostic criteria.... so..... yeah. Are they just having great results with varying forms of treatments based on race? or is there a real objective (and useful) distinction to be made?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21879184 - 06/30/15 05:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: are you guys seriously saying that because the chart on the wall in school that shows the Taxonomy Tree doesn't have under "Homo Sapiens" the terms "Homo Sapien Negrus" and "Homo Sapien anglicus" that it isn't a valid distinction with valid criteria?
I really hope that isn't your position at this point....
I can't remember who cited the Wikipedia page on Race (biology), but that is exactly what it refers to. A taxonomic distinction below species. Those currently do not exist for humans, there is only Homo sapiens sapiens. Therefore, that page is irrelevant to a discussion about humans.
It said that it was an informal classification... meaning once again that no one dare make it a classification lest they be labelled a racist and compared to nazi scientists.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21879406 - 06/30/15 06:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said: It said that it was an informal classification... meaning once again that no one dare make it a classification lest they be labelled a racist and compared to nazi scientists.
It's amazing how many conservatives believe scientists are more motivated by politics than by science. As if they went to college for 10 years so they can just make things up rather than using the scientific method and peer review.
But that's not how science works. And if you claim it is, I'd like to see some evidence showing significant numbers of scientists make up their conclusions.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
|
can i introduce you to the pharmaceutical industry and the branch of "science" called psychiatry?
|
Shins
Fun guy



Registered: 09/15/04
Posts: 16,337
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21879662 - 06/30/15 07:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Liberals think sociology is a hard science.
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21879958 - 06/30/15 08:08 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
Quote:
Either you didn't mean to say this, or you are agreeing with me without knowing it. Maybe you meant discriminately? Because that is what they do.
Yes, I'm on my phone and often make typos. And that is not what they do. They affect people with susceptibilities, but not entire racial groups.
This is like saying just because there are non-blond-haired Caucasians, that means blondism is not a trait typically only found in the Caucasian races.
Traits don't need to be prevalent in the ENTIRE race of people in order for it to be considered that race's key trait.
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 08:11 PM)
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21879962 - 06/30/15 08:10 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Also, I think that SneezingPenis brought up a very good point. If human races were truly only an illusory social construct, how come viruses infect different races at different rates?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21879973 - 06/30/15 08:13 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Because different races have different frequencies of certain genetic traits, in some cases. In other cases, cultural factors can make diseases more or less prevalent.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21879998 - 06/30/15 08:20 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Because different races have different frequencies of certain genetic traits, in some cases. In other cases, cultural factors can make diseases more or less prevalent.
These things, "different frequencies of certain genetic traits", sound like they are real and bio-genetically based.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21880035 - 06/30/15 08:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
'The encyclopedia is wrong', 'The scientists are liars', when I find myself making these bold claims, I generally accept that I am on the wrong side of an argument. As far as this claim that scientists are trying to avoid being labeled a racist, there is the equally assinine argument that scientists arguing for racial distinction actually do have racist motivations for making that claim. Science is science. It is not so easily subject to politics as you imply.
On the issue of syckle cell anemia. I am curious, if a small white population were isolated to a region with malaria for an extended period of time, and developed syckle cell anemia, would you consider them to be a new race? How many genetic markers must be different for a new race to be defined?
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880036 - 06/30/15 08:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
No one is arguing that racial lines aren't drawn in a way that separates them by genetic traits. That's not the point. Those lines are still arbitrary and have no relation to biological races. Instead, they are simply drawn based on societal values. Racial lines could have just as easily been drawn based on eye color or blood type, and they'd be just as predictive as they are now.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880074 - 06/30/15 08:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: No one is arguing that racial lines aren't drawn in a way that separates them by genetic traits. That's not the point. Those lines are still arbitrary and have no relation to biological races. Instead, they are simply drawn based on societal values. Racial lines could have just as easily been drawn based on eye color or blood type, and they'd be just as predictive as they are now.
Im sorry Enlil but I don't quite get what is meant by "(lines) being drawn based on societal values". When I look at a person and try to determined his race, I use my eyes. I don't consult any "societal values" or whatever, in order to tell his race.
Do you think that races are real?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880090 - 06/30/15 08:37 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Only because you were taught to distinguish races by skin color. That's what I mean by societal values.
Biologically, race has a meaning, and no races in humans have been defined. Socially, race has a different meaning.
I've said this too many times in too many ways. I'm starting to think that certain people just aren't going to get it.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880111 - 06/30/15 08:40 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Only because you were taught to distinguish races by skin color. That's what I mean by societal values.
Biologically, race has a meaning, and no races in humans have been defined. Socially, race has a different meaning.
I've said this too many times in too many ways. I'm starting to think that certain people just aren't going to get it.
No. I don't go by just skin colour. If that were the case then certain pale-skinned Japanese people would be white to me, but this is simply not the case.
When I look at someone's face with the aim of determining his race, I take many factors into account. I look at his facial features, facial bone structure, hair and eye colour, and sometimes even his demeanor. Nobody ever "taught" me to do any of this but I do it on my own anyway. So I fail to grasp how it is mere "societal values" that made me do this.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880120 - 06/30/15 08:42 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
All of those factors were chosen arbitrarily, however, and you were taught to look for them. That's the point. You may not know you were taught, but you were.
I'm pretty sure you're never going to grasp any of it, frankly.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880151 - 06/30/15 08:48 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: All of those factors were chosen arbitrarily, however, and you were taught to look for them. That's the point. You may not know you were taught, but you were.
I'm pretty sure you're never going to grasp any of it, frankly.
But I swear to the stars above that nobody "taught" me to look for any of those things. I just do it on my own. Trust me on this. I grew up in Asia, and there were very very few white people where I grew up. Growing up and being educated, it was never our teachers' (and maybe family members) aim to "teach" us how to tell a white person from an Asian person. There was no need for it.
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 08:49 PM)
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880179 - 06/30/15 08:54 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
WAN said: Also, I think that SneezingPenis brought up a very good point. If human races were truly only an illusory social construct, how come viruses infect different races at different rates?
What the fuck does this have to do with anything?
Also, as far as 'blondism', you are right. Eastern europeans tend to be almost entirely brown haired and brown eyed, but white skin. Western Europeans have a large range of variance in phenotype. They're all considered 'white' based on skin color. Skin color is generally the factor behind race distinction, and that is not a significant genetic difference.
I did once meet a guy from azerbaijan who thought that I was superior to him because I have dark blonde hair and green eyes. It was weird. Those people are very racist. I didn't see any distinction. I think it was about as stupid as the arguments being made here.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (06/30/15 08:55 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880185 - 06/30/15 08:55 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Everything you know to do, you were taught.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21880207 - 06/30/15 08:59 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
WAN said: Also, I think that SneezingPenis brought up a very good point. If human races were truly only an illusory social construct, how come viruses infect different races at different rates?
What the fuck does this have to do with anything?
It's relevant because having viruses that infect different races at different rates means that races have biological basis. Viruses and bacteria do not know what a "social construct" is.
Funny how you swore at me. You seem to take this discussion very personally and perhaps I touched a nerve.
Quote:
Also, as far as 'blondism', you are right. Eastern europeans tend to be almost entirely brown haired and brown eyed, but white skin. Western Europeans have a large range of variance in phenotype. They're all considered 'white' based on skin color. Skin color is generally the factor behind race distinction, and that is not a significant genetic difference.
Skin colour is ONE factor in determining someone's race, but NOT the only one.
Quote:
I did once meet a guy from azerbaijan who thought that I was superior to him because I have dark blonde hair and green eyes. It was weird. Those people are very racist. I didn't see any distinction. I think it was about as stupid as the arguments being made here.
Another ad hominem (sort of). Although you weren't truly calling ME stupid. I just think that if you are just going to cuss people out instead of putting forth rational arguments, you should just stop embarrassing yourself and wasting people's time.
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 09:01 PM)
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880212 - 06/30/15 09:00 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Everything you know to do, you were taught.
Not really. Ever notice how new-born infants automatically search for nipples with their mouths and they immediately start sucking when a nipple is placed in them? This is instinctual.
|
Falcon91Wolvrn03
Stranger



Registered: 03/16/05
Posts: 32,557
Loc: California, US
Last seen: 4 months, 22 days
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Shins]
#21880233 - 06/30/15 09:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Shins said: Liberals think sociology is a hard science.
Another straw man. First of all, no one said it was. Second, and more important, biology is at the heart of this debate.
Sociology simply tries to explain why we draw racial lines, given biology appears not to support the concept.
-------------------- I am in a minority on the shroomery, as I frequently defend the opposing side when they have a point about something or when my side make believes something about them. I also attack my side if I think they're wrong. People here get very confused by that and think it means I prefer the other side.
Edited by Falcon91Wolvrn03 (06/30/15 09:14 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880234 - 06/30/15 09:07 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Lol, you aren't actually arguing that racial classification is instinctual, are you? That's even more ludicrous than the argument that it's biological.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880248 - 06/30/15 09:11 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Lol, you aren't actually argue that racial classification is instinctual, are you? That's even more ludicrous than the argument that it's biological.
I wasn't saying that the ability to make racial classification is instinctual (though it could be). I was merely countering your claim that "everything you know to do, it is taught". This is utterly false.
I feel that you are trying to belittle my argument and by extension, me, though. Maybe you should try to be a bit more professional and deal with my arguments instead of doing things like this.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880276 - 06/30/15 09:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
This isn't a professional situation. This is an internet forum. I've made my arguments and cited my sources. In return, the opposing side has offered nothing but anecdotes, fallacies, and irrelevancies.
If you want to engage in a logical debate, you'll need to up your game significantly. You can't expect anyone to take you seriously until you do that.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880284 - 06/30/15 09:22 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Viruses affect different races at different rates due to different exposure rates. As far as I am aware that is the only factor involved.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880291 - 06/30/15 09:24 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: This isn't a professional situation. This is an internet forum. I've made my arguments and cited my sources. In return, the opposing side has offered nothing but anecdotes, fallacies, and irrelevancies.
If you want to engage in a logical debate, you'll need to up your game significantly. You can't expect anyone to take you seriously until you do that.
I don't totally disagree with any of that (although I think that the opposite side has some good arguments, too). But I just want to know 1. why you think that "everything you know to do, you are taught". And 2. do you acknowledge that you are wrong for saying this.
P.s. I see that you are implying that my "game" is inadequate. Is this how you normally weasel out of a losing position, enlil?
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 09:25 PM)
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880302 - 06/30/15 09:27 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
You know, this argument died in the scientific world long before racism was so taboo.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880340 - 06/30/15 09:36 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
WAN said:
Quote:
Enlil said: This isn't a professional situation. This is an internet forum. I've made my arguments and cited my sources. In return, the opposing side has offered nothing but anecdotes, fallacies, and irrelevancies.
If you want to engage in a logical debate, you'll need to up your game significantly. You can't expect anyone to take you seriously until you do that.
I don't totally disagree with any of that (although I think that the opposite side has some good arguments, too). But I just want to know 1. why you think that "everything you know to do, you are taught". And 2. do you acknowledge that you are wrong for saying this.
P.s. I see that you are implying that my "game" is inadequate. Is this how you normally weasel out of a losing position, enlil?
Humans are born with arguably less instinct than any other mammal. That is because their brains have more developement to undergo after birth than any other animal. So yes, you are taught to think and do everything you think and do, to varying extents, via verbal and non-verbal que's. Learning capability and physical limitations also have an impact. If a black child is raised by a white family they don't see their parents as different, or brothers and sisters as a different race. I have a half brother who is half Kuwaiti. He never realized he was "different" from us til we were in our teens, and I didn't either.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880361 - 06/30/15 09:41 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
WAN said:
P.s. I see that you are implying that my "game" is inadequate. Is this how you normally weasel out of a losing position, enlil?
Frankly, you've offered even less than the rest of the people on that side of the argument, and they've offered close to nothing.
If you have a rational argument based on facts from credible sources, I'm all eyes. Show your stuff.
As far as a losing position, this debate has been so one sided, it's laughable. I don't think any educated person would read this and think I am in a losing position here.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880379 - 06/30/15 09:43 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
WAN said:
P.s. I see that you are implying that my "game" is inadequate. Is this how you normally weasel out of a losing position, enlil?
Frankly, you've offered even less than the rest of the people on that side of the argument, and they've offered close to nothing.
If you have a rational argument based on facts from credible sources, I'm all eyes. Show your stuff.
As far as a losing position, this debate has been so one sided, it's laughable. I don't think any educated person would read this and think I am in a losing position here.
O rly?
You said this: "everything you know to do, you were taught". I countered with the new-borns' nipple-sucking instinct. So my questions to you are: 1. why do you say this and 2. do you acknowledge that you are wrong?
Just in case you are going to weasel out again, let me state my question one more time: Enlil why did you say "everything you know how to do, you were taught"?
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880396 - 06/30/15 09:49 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I didn't say that. If you haven't figured out by now, I choose my words very carefully.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880409 - 06/30/15 09:51 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: I didn't say that. If you haven't figured out by now, I choose my words very carefully.
I might have paraphrased it, so I went back to your original post. Here is what you literally said, word for word: "Everything you know to do, you were taught."
Why did you say this? And, do you admit that you are wrong for saying this?
It was from post #13 on page 10
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 09:52 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880418 - 06/30/15 09:54 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I said it because it's true and happened to be relevant to your point.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880429 - 06/30/15 09:56 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: I said it because it's true and happened to be relevant to your point.
But it was clearly false, because I showed you with my argument that new born infants automatically suck on a nipple that's placed in their mouths. Some behaviors are instinctual. So this refutes your argument that "everything you know to do, you were taught".
Enlil why did you say that "everything you know to do, you were taught", and do you acknowledge that you are wrong for saying this?
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 09:57 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880438 - 06/30/15 09:58 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Automatically doing something has nothing to do with my statement.
We breathe automatically. We don't instinctively know to breathe, however. We just do it.
Your suckling example. We don't know to do it...we just do it. Later, we learn to suckle upon breasts, too, and we know to do that during sexual intercourse.
I choose my words carefully, as I said. If I meant that everything we do, we were taught, I'd have said that. So far, no...I don't see where I was wrong in that.
This is, however getting pretty off-topic. Are you going to bring this back to the point at hand? Or are you just trying to pump your ego here?
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880452 - 06/30/15 10:02 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Automatically doing something has nothing to do with my statements.
We breathe automatically. We don't instinctively know to breathe however. We just do it.
But doing something automatically IS the definition of "instinctual behavior". If we know how to breathe automatically, it means this behavior is instinctual, and not taught.
Quote:
Your suckling example. We don't know to do it...we just do it. Later, we learn to suckle upon breasts, too, and we know to do that during sexual intercourse.
I choose my words carefully, as I said. If I meant that everything we do, we were taught, I'd have said that.
That was in fact what you did say. You said this: "Everything you know to do, you were taught". You said "everything", so "everything" is what you meant.
I think you should just admit you were wrong when you said that. It doesn't make you less of a man. Watching you squirm and try to play semantic games like this is painful to me.
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 10:02 PM)
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880469 - 06/30/15 10:06 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
WAN said: But doing something automatically IS the definition of "instinctual behavior". If we know how to breathe automatically, it means this behavior is instinctual, and not taught.
Of course it is. We don't disagree on this fact. That is wholly irrelevant to my statement, though. I didn't talk about what we do or what we know HOW to do (as you tried to attribute to me). I am talking about what we know to do.
Autonomous behavior has no knowledge associated with it. You breathe without knowledge of your breath. Eventually, you learn about it and gain knowledge, and you can even change it. The autonomous part is instinctual, but the knowledge is taught.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880503 - 06/30/15 10:12 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
WAN said: But doing something automatically IS the definition of "instinctual behavior". If we know how to breathe automatically, it means this behavior is instinctual, and not taught.
Of course it is. We don't disagree on this fact. That is wholly irrelevant to my statement, though. I didn't talk about what we do or what we know HOW to do (as you tried to attribute to me). I am talking about what we know to do.
What is the difference between "what we know to do", and "what we do/what we know how to do"?
You are just playing word games to try to save the last bit of your dignity (and reputation) here. If you would just admit you were wrong when you said "everything you know to do, you were taught", you would actually appear more dignified. There is no shame in admitting that one's wrong. This is how we grow as people, after all.
Quote:
Autonomous behavior has no knowledge associated with it. You breathe without knowledge of your breath. Eventually, you learn about it and gain knowledge, and you can even change it. The autonomous part is instinctual, but the knowledge is taught.
You don't need any "knowledge" to breathe. There is also no "two parts" to breathing, as you said. Breathing has only one part, the automatic part. And it is automatic because this behavior known as breathing, is instinctual. You also don't "eventually learn about breathing and gain knowledge". This is false. Breathing comes naturally to us and we do it automatically, because this behavior is, you guessed it, instinctual.
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880520 - 06/30/15 10:15 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Wan, whether you believe it or not, I intentionally put the word "know" in there for a reason. I'm not going to derail this thread any further. If it makes you feel better to claim some kind of victory over this silly little point, go for it.
If you have a logical argument related to race as a social construct vs biological classification, I'm all eyes.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880548 - 06/30/15 10:19 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Wan, whether you believe it or not, I intentionally put the word "know" in there for a reason. I'm not going to derail this thread any further. If it makes you feel better to claim some kind of victory over this silly little point, go for it.
If you have a logical argument related to race as a social construct vs biological classification, I'm all eyes.
If this were a "silly little point", you would not have wasted so much time and written so many posts back and forth with me. You just want out because you know you are losing.
Anyway, back on topic. I think sneezingPenis is right. Viruses and bacteria infect different races at different rates, this means that races do have some biological basis. If races were purely social constructs, these micro-organisms would just infect us all more or less equally.
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 10:20 PM)
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880563 - 06/30/15 10:21 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Why don't we stop focusing on semantic bullshit, and get back to the discussion you were losing WAN. Can you prove that race identification is one of these instincts? I am quite sure human instinct doesn't go beyond breathing and sucking titties. Do have have evidence against my argument?
My anecdotal claim regarding my half Kuwaiti brother is stronger than the void of evidence to the contrary.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880587 - 06/30/15 10:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
So, Malaria affects black people at a higher rate. You're saying that's race-related? You don't think the fact that large populations of black people live in places with improper sanitation has something to do with it?
Why don't we see a lot of malaria in South Central Los Angeles? Are they less black?
Of course, as we've already argued above, this is completely beside the point. Biological race has a meaning. To refresh your recollection, you can read up on it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(biology)
Read carefully, and you'll notice that there is no discussion of race in humans in that entire article. Read this, however:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification)
Now, I'm not citing either as sources, since Wiki isn't the best source. I'm just trying to help you understand what we're talking about when we say "biologically based race" and "race as a human construct". Race has several meanings, and the scientific term is not the same as the colloquial term.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21880588 - 06/30/15 10:26 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Why don't we stop focusing on semantic bullshit, and get back to the discussion you were losing WAN. Can you prove that race identification is one of these instincts? I am quite sure human instinct doesn't go beyond breathing and sucking titties. Do have have evidence against my argument?
I never claimed that racial identification is instinctual. You are setting up a straw-man. Also, I see that you are still butt-hurt. So much so that you have lost the ability to be impartial (if you were truly impartial then you would be able to tell that I kicked Enlil's ass so hard, that he's bowed out of our discusioon). But maybe it's because impartiality is not in you. I don't blame you. Some people are born with some form of handicap and/or character flaws, they can't help it.
Quote:
My anecdotal claim regarding my half Kuwaiti brother is stronger than the void of evidence to the contrary.
So this is why you took this thread and my argument so personally.
Edited by WAN (06/30/15 10:27 PM)
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21880600 - 06/30/15 10:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: So, Malaria affects black people at a higher rate. You're saying that's race-related? You don't think the fact that large populations of black people live in places with improper sanitation has something to do with it?
Why don't we see a lot of malaria in South Central Los Angeles? Are they less black?
Of course, as we've already argued above, this is completely beside the point. Biological race has a meaning. To refresh your recollection, you can read up on it here:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(biology)
Read carefully, and you'll notice that there is no discussion of race in humans in that entire article. Read this, however:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification)
Now, I'm not citing either as sources, since Wiki isn't the best source. I'm just trying to help you understand what we're talking about when we say "biologically based race" and "race as a human construct". Race has several meanings, and the scientific term is not the same as the colloquial term.
Well, do you have a source other than wikipedia? Also, what is the REAL definition of race, then? I want to hear your own thoughts, not some more outside links, if possible.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880601 - 06/30/15 10:29 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
WAN said:
Quote:
Enlil said: Wan, whether you believe it or not, I intentionally put the word "know" in there for a reason. I'm not going to derail this thread any further. If it makes you feel better to claim some kind of victory over this silly little point, go for it.
If you have a logical argument related to race as a social construct vs biological classification, I'm all eyes.
If this were a "silly little point", you would not have wasted so much time and written so many posts back and forth with me. You just want out because you know you are losing.
Anyway, back on topic. I think sneezingPenis is right. Viruses and bacteria infect different races at different rates, this means that races do have some biological basis. If races were purely social constructs, these micro-organisms would just infect us all more or less equally.
Ok, now its time to put your critical thinking cap on . Bacteria and viruses don't infect different races at different rates if exposure is equal. Malaria isn't bacterial or viral, and sickle cell anemia evolved in certain populations (a small subset of those considered to be 'black') due to increased exposure rates, which skew the results.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
Enlil
OTD God-King




Registered: 08/16/03
Posts: 65,507
Loc: Uncanny Valley
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880615 - 06/30/15 10:33 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
I've already cited multiple sources other than wiki.
You want my thoughts? Race is a social construct that was largely formed by classifying people by where they came from or were originally encountered. Eventually, science sought to explain it and came up the laughable theories of the late 19th century and the early 20th century. Today, with a solid understanding of genetics, science has abandoned the notion that race is based on any natural classification and is instead wholly arbitrary and socially constructed.
I agree with this modern scientific view.
-------------------- Censoring opposing views since 2014. Ask an Attorney Fuck the Amish
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880627 - 06/30/15 10:37 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
WAN said:
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Why don't we stop focusing on semantic bullshit, and get back to the discussion you were losing WAN. Can you prove that race identification is one of these instincts? I am quite sure human instinct doesn't go beyond breathing and sucking titties. Do have have evidence against my argument?
I never claimed that racial identification is instinctual. You are setting up a straw-man. Also, I see that you are still butt-hurt. So much so that you have lost the ability to be impartial (if you were truly impartial then you would be able to tell that I kicked Enlil's ass so hard, that he's bowed out of our discusioon). But maybe it's because impartiality is not in you. I don't blame you. Some people are born with some form of handicap and/or character flaws, they can't help it.
Quote:
My anecdotal claim regarding my half Kuwaiti brother is stronger than the void of evidence to the contrary.
So this is why you took this thread and my argument so personally.
I haven't taken your poor arguments hard. Especially that slew of ad hominems and straw men. I don't see my half Kuwaiti brother's 'race' as better or worse than my own. He is who he is. My experience is what I brought to this discussion, but just as any racist would, you glossed over my point while stuck on the idea of a multiracial family being a sore spot.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
WAN
Stranger
Registered: 10/20/14
Posts: 1,895
Last seen: 7 years, 7 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21880634 - 06/30/15 10:39 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said:
Quote:
WAN said:
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Why don't we stop focusing on semantic bullshit, and get back to the discussion you were losing WAN. Can you prove that race identification is one of these instincts? I am quite sure human instinct doesn't go beyond breathing and sucking titties. Do have have evidence against my argument?
I never claimed that racial identification is instinctual. You are setting up a straw-man. Also, I see that you are still butt-hurt. So much so that you have lost the ability to be impartial (if you were truly impartial then you would be able to tell that I kicked Enlil's ass so hard, that he's bowed out of our discusioon). But maybe it's because impartiality is not in you. I don't blame you. Some people are born with some form of handicap and/or character flaws, they can't help it.
Quote:
My anecdotal claim regarding my half Kuwaiti brother is stronger than the void of evidence to the contrary.
So this is why you took this thread and my argument so personally.
I haven't taken your poor arguments hard. Especially that slew of ad hominems and straw men. I don't see my half Kuwaiti brother's 'race' as better or worse than my own. He is who he is. My experience is what I brought to this discussion, but just as any racist would, you glossed over my point while stuck on the idea of a multiracial family being a sore spot.
A whole slew of ad hominems? Look who's talking. YOU are the one who's been taking shots at me, for no reason at all, just because I hold a different view than you do. You are a truly close-minded person.
also, your family's blood line is being mongrelized. Sorry to hear that bro.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: WAN]
#21880725 - 06/30/15 10:56 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Wow. I never once attacked your character. Only your ill-conceived arguments. I prefer to allow you to paint yourself in the color best suited you, as you have just done.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21881050 - 07/01/15 12:33 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: 'The encyclopedia is wrong', 'The scientists are liars', when I find myself making these bold claims, I generally accept that I am on the wrong side of an argument. As far as this claim that scientists are trying to avoid being labeled a racist, there is the equally assinine argument that scientists arguing for racial distinction actually do have racist motivations for making that claim. Science is science. It is not so easily subject to politics as you imply.
On the issue of syckle cell anemia. I am curious, if a small white population were isolated to a region with malaria for an extended period of time, and developed syckle cell anemia, would you consider them to be a new race? How many genetic markers must be different for a new race to be defined?
once it becomes a relevant box to check on a medical form...
and lets clarify something here... Enlil, you or that other guy have provided ZERO facts or studies. ZERO. All they have cited is opinions of scientists that are not based upon fact or science.
Real scientific discovery and proof means that there is no discussion about that precise thing anymore. What you guys are doing is tantamount to quoting quantum physicists as saying "I believe there are 23 dimensions" and then claiming that it is proof that 23 dimensions exist. We are in an era of Meta-science where the goal is not definitive proof, but rather a creation of correlated data sets to favor a theory. need proof?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21881054 - 07/01/15 12:36 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Because different races have different frequencies of certain genetic traits, in some cases. In other cases, cultural factors can make diseases more or less prevalent.
why is that distinction able to be made without the accusation of it being a social construct yet calling that very same thing by a different name (race) a social construct?
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21881062 - 07/01/15 12:38 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: No one is arguing that racial lines aren't drawn in a way that separates them by genetic traits. That's not the point. Those lines are still arbitrary and have no relation to biological races. Instead, they are simply drawn based on societal values. Racial lines could have just as easily been drawn based on eye color or blood type, and they'd be just as predictive as they are now.
No, you are citing genetic traits that span and can express themselves over 1-2 generations. The genetic traits that we are talking about happened over thousands of years and came about over hundreds of generations to instill themselves as a very good indicator of race and ancestral origin.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21881076 - 07/01/15 12:44 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: Lol, you aren't actually arguing that racial classification is instinctual, are you? That's even more ludicrous than the argument that it's biological.
Asking "why?" is instinctual. A child asking "why is that mans skin black" is not caused by someone telling them anything.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Bigbadwooof]
#21881094 - 07/01/15 12:52 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Bigbadwooof said: Viruses affect different races at different rates due to different exposure rates. As far as I am aware that is the only factor involved.
The HIV virus affects black people differently than all other groups. Now I hope that I have not given the idea that a virus is sentient and chooses to punish the black man more severely... no, it is due to their genetic makeup... but there is enough of a distinction that HIV affects them more aggressively.. also there are multiple HIV treatments that have side effects that occur almost entirely only in black people--again due to their genetic makeup. ipso facto, there is an objective distinction that is being made by things not associated in any way possible to a social construct. ipso motherfuckin facto.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21881105 - 07/01/15 12:56 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said:
Quote:
WAN said:
P.s. I see that you are implying that my "game" is inadequate. Is this how you normally weasel out of a losing position, enlil?
Frankly, you've offered even less than the rest of the people on that side of the argument, and they've offered close to nothing.
If you have a rational argument based on facts from credible sources, I'm all eyes. Show your stuff.
As far as a losing position, this debate has been so one sided, it's laughable. I don't think any educated person would read this and think I am in a losing position here.
lets review the scoreboard here.
Studies provided: Enlil: 0 SP: 2
Points made that have yet to be addressed and refuted: Enlil: 0 SP: too many to count
number of times emphatically stating an opinion as fact: enlil: too many times to count SP: 0
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: Enlil]
#21881147 - 07/01/15 01:07 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Enlil said: So, Malaria affects black people at a higher rate. You're saying that's race-related? You don't think the fact that large populations of black people live in places with improper sanitation has something to do with it?
If the place you are living is malaria infested and compounded by lack of potable water.. after hundreds of years the "weak" die off and the people with SCA go on to proliferate. This isn't, stick a white man on malaria island and see if he magically develops SCA... this is hundreds if not thousands of years of a process that spread throughout a region that later became defined along with other genetic phenotypes that made their subset more resilient in their environment.
Somehow, your argument has become "but yeah, aside from all that genetic stuff, there is no objectively discernable differences".... yeah, you are basically agreeing with us, but somehow unable to admit it... so you cite semantics as the culprit. What is there beyond genetic differences? That is THE ONLY objectively discernable criteria for anything--which means that really, you just have a problem with the word "race" and no real objection to making distinctions based on genetic variance.
and once again you are claiming that because the arbitrary process in which biological taxonomy is predicated upon doesn't include a FORMAL distinction that it is proof that it doesn't objectively exist.... meaning that the socially constructed table of making distinctions between organisms doesn't officially recognize a distinction in humans beyond species is proof that no objective distinction can be made.... which is absolutely ludicrous.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21881479 - 07/01/15 02:54 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Alright, this thread has had quite a bit of activity since I went to sleep, so I'm going to respond in general to the points I've read, as it would take to long to go point by point. Thus, if I miss a point you wish me to discuss, just let me know.
First of all, I think it's important that we are actually arguing over a unified point, which I don't think is happening. To say race is a social construct does not mean that there are no biological differences between the races. To say that there is no biological basis is not to say that there are no differences between the races.
When I say race is a social construct, I'm saying that the racial lines were drawn based on social ideas, not biological ones. I'm saying that members of the black race are categorized and identified based on appearance and nothing more. Same with Asian, Hispanic, Caucasian, etc. This is absolutely true.
For race to also have a biological basis, there would have to be a way to separate groups biologically and get the exact same divisions. If you look for malarial susceptibility, you wouldn't end up with all blacks, just some of them. The same will hold true for every disease, because as I mentioned before, viruses and bacteria attack susceptible individuals, not individuals of certain races.
Pointing out that the races aren't identical biologically means nothing in terms of race being a social construct. Any two groups will not be identical. The key is showing that the racial divisions are based on some inherent genotype, rather than an inherent phenotype and learned behavior.
Now, SP, you didn't cite a study as far as I could find (if you did and I missed it, I apologize). You did, however, cite an article which cites a study that is very relevant to that exact point. The problem with that is that articles written about papers are almost universally crap, because while scientists are trying to report data, a journalist is trying to make a story. So, I went and found the paper in question, and it says:
Quote:
This result indicates that studies using genetic clusters instead of racial/ethnic labels are likely to simply reproduce racial/ethnic differences, which may or may not be genetic. On the other hand, in the absence of racial/ethnic information, it is tempting to attribute any observed difference between derived genetic clusters to a genetic etiology. Therefore, researchers performing studies without racial/ethnic labels should be wary of characterizing difference between genetically defined clusters as genetic in origin, since social, cultural, economic, behavioral, and other environmental factors may result in extreme confounding.
The paper was not arguing that race is defined by genetics and specifically says it may or may not be. It's not particularly helpful to your position to cite a paper that says your position may or may not be true, and then tout it as some winning blow. Again, this is why it's always best to get your information directly from the source, not after it has been shaped by inherent biases of the journalist.
Now, once again, there are a minority of scientists who do actually believe that when society determined race, the divisions ended up being based on genetic differences. If you believe them that's fine, but it's important that you understand that it's not the majority opinion. Too many people decide their opinion and then go looking for evidence to support it, and are often blinded to the evidence offered by the other side. To simply call the EB wrong, but not offer any reason why, is hilarious example of this. However, since you all seem hellbent on ignoring the EB, have some papers:
Hochman A. (2013) writes: "Human biological diversity was shown to be predominantly clinal, or gradual, not discreet, and clustered, as racial naturalism implied." and "While social constructionism about race became the majority consensus view on the topic social constructionism has always had its critics."
Gravlee (2009) writes: "Here, I summarize this evidence and argue that the debate over racial inequalities in health presents an opportunity to refine the critique of race in three ways: 1) to reiterate why the race concept is inconsistent with patterns of global human genetic diversity; 2) to refocus attention on the complex, environmental influences on human biology at multiple levels of analysis and across the lifecourse; and 3) to revise the claim that race is a cultural construct and expand research on the sociocultural reality of race and racism."
Witzig (1996) writes: "This division of Homo sapiens into race taxons started in the 18th century, when the sciences of genetics and evolutionary biology were not yet invented. These disciplines have since shown that human race taxonomy has no scientific basis. Race categories are social constructs, that is, concepts created from prevailing social perceptions without scientific evidence. Despite modern proof that race is arbitrary biological fiction, racial taxons are still used widely in medical teaching, practice, and research. "
So, to reiterate, in biology, genetic variation does not happen in discreet groupings as it does with race. Race was determined based on social ideals and modern biology has found no basis for those distinctions. Therefore, race is, and has always been, nothing more than a social construct. If I missed any of your arguments, I apologize and would be happy to respond to them.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21881576 - 07/01/15 04:07 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
When I say race is a social construct, I'm saying that the racial lines were drawn based on social ideas, not biological ones. I'm saying that members of the black race are categorized and identified based on appearance and nothing more. Same with Asian, Hispanic, Caucasian, etc. This is absolutely true.
This is exactly what the first (article linked to) study I gave talked about. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CAzOHFxVAAAqaKX.png
Race has been defined for a lot longer than the 1800's, so yes it was prior to even the concepts of genetics or biology, but it doesn't make it invalid or simply a social construct. First guy to start washing his hands didn't know why his patients suffered less infection, he just found it to be true. Doesn't mean that bacteria don't exist because the first person to identify a distinction was wrong in their pursuit of addressing the issue.
I am not sure which link you pulled the study from, but this first one addresses this very point...
Quote:
It found that people’s self-identified race is a nearly perfect indicator of their genetic background, contradicting the race-as-social-construct view, Risch said.
The participants identified themselves as either white, African-American, East Asian or Hispanic. For each participant, the researchers examined 326 DNA regions that tend to vary between people. These regions are not necessarily within functioning genes—some regions of the genome have no known use—but are simply genetic signposts that come in a variety of forms at the same place.
Without knowing how the participants had identified themselves, Risch and his team ran the results through a computer program that grouped individuals according to patterns of the 326 signposts. This analysis could have resulted in any number of different clusters, but only four clear groups turned up. And in each case the individuals within those clusters all fell within the same self-identified racial group.
I think this is a weak study, but at least it is beyond stating a scientists opinion... But anyway, it shows that there is a correlation to people self-identifying based on (what we can assume) the socially constructed concept of racial distinction and having that perfectly reflect the objective biological distinction.
Quote:
For race to also have a biological basis, there would have to be a way to separate groups biologically and get the exact same divisions. If you look for malarial susceptibility, you wouldn't end up with all blacks, just some of them. The same will hold true for every disease, because as I mentioned before, viruses and bacteria attack susceptible individuals, not individuals of certain races.
No, but you would end up with a statistically relevant majority of them. If a person can look at only a drop of blood and know nothing else of where that blood came from, and they could tell you whether or not they were black, white, asian or hispanic... how could that still be rooted in social construct?
Quote:
Quote:
Therefore, researchers performing studies without racial/ethnic labels should be wary of characterizing difference between genetically defined clusters as genetic in origin, since social, cultural, economic, behavioral, and other environmental factors may result in extreme confounding.
The paper was not arguing that race is defined by genetics and specifically says it may or may not be. It's not particularly helpful to your position to cite a paper that says your position may or may not be true, and then tout it as some winning blow. Again, this is why it's always best to get your information directly from the source, not after it has been shaped by inherent biases of the journalist.
No, this study was merely trying to show if perceived race lines up with regionally distinct genetic markers (aka race)... and it did that pretty well. You are misreading what the bold parts are actually saying. It is referring to two types of studies: ones that do not make the superficial distinction and ones that make a genetic distinction as a primary criteria for choosing acceptable candidates or using it as a control/variable. The first bold sentence is poorly worded and I see the possible ambiguity in reading it, but it is simply stating the obvious that the superficial distinction of race may or may not be rooted in genetics... not implying that making a genetic distinction may or may not be rooted in genetics (because that would be stupid). The second bold sentence is simply stating that if you are doing a study and do not make an initial distinction (superficial or genetic) should not be tempted to correlate any discovered distinctions to genetics because they could in fact be caused by other factors. That part isn't even talking about this study, or racial studies... it is just talking about all studies. It does seem confusing though. It is just poorly worded. Hell the study is pretty shabby. Would have made more sense to have other people try to determine the peoples race and see how well that lined up with their actual genetic cluster.
Quote:
Now, once again, there are a minority of scientists who do actually believe that when society determined race, the divisions ended up being based on genetic differences. If you believe them that's fine, but it's important that you understand that it's not the majority opinion.
Im ok with disagreeing with majority opinion... even of scientists.
Quote:
Too many people decide their opinion and then go looking for evidence to support it, and are often blinded to the evidence offered by the other side. To simply call the EB wrong, but not offer any reason why, is hilarious example of this. However, since you all seem hellbent on ignoring the EB, have some papers:
I wasn't refuting EB, I was refuting your use of it as empirical. It cited no studies and used very vague wording. It even stated that it was a concensus. It contained no science or supporting data.
Quote:
Hochman A. (2013) writes: "Human biological diversity was shown to be predominantly clinal, or gradual, not discreet, and clustered, as racial naturalism implied." and "While social constructionism about race became the majority consensus view on the topic social constructionism has always had its critics."
This is not a study, but rather a paper critiquing a study by a racial naturalist. All I could get at was the abstract.
Quote:
Gravlee (2009) writes: "Here, I summarize this evidence and argue that the debate over racial inequalities in health presents an opportunity to refine the critique of race in three ways: 1) to reiterate why the race concept is inconsistent with patterns of global human genetic diversity; 2) to refocus attention on the complex, environmental influences on human biology at multiple levels of analysis and across the lifecourse; and 3) to revise the claim that race is a cultural construct and expand research on the sociocultural reality of race and racism."
again, a critique... again a scientists opinion.
Quote:
Witzig (1996) writes: "This division of Homo sapiens into race taxons started in the 18th century, when the sciences of genetics and evolutionary biology were not yet invented. These disciplines have since shown that human race taxonomy has no scientific basis. Race categories are social constructs, that is, concepts created from prevailing social perceptions without scientific evidence. Despite modern proof that race is arbitrary biological fiction, racial taxons are still used widely in medical teaching, practice, and research. "
Seriously, did you type in "scientists musings on why the feel race is wrong"? These are not studies. This is not empirical. You may as well be citing from "Everybody poops".... well not even, because even that has some scientific validity in it.
Quote:
So, to reiterate, in biology, genetic variation does not happen in discreet groupings as it does with race. Race was determined based on social ideals and modern biology has found no basis for those distinctions. Therefore, race is, and has always been, nothing more than a social construct. If I missed any of your arguments, I apologize and would be happy to respond to them.
So while all the scientists that have conducted studies and favored on the Racial naturalist side, they were just myopic racist scientists trying to keep darky down... but all those other scientists writing opinions about their studies to "revise the claim that race is a cultural construct" should be published in the NEJM.
|
BoldAsLove
Pokemon Master


Registered: 03/10/11
Posts: 2,549
Loc: Kanto Region
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21881679 - 07/01/15 05:20 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
SneezingPenis said:
I am not sure which link you pulled the study from, but this first one addresses this very point...
That's the link I pulled it from and that's the exact study I took the quotes from.
Quote:
I think this is a weak study, but at least it is beyond stating a scientists opinion... But anyway, it shows that there is a correlation to people self-identifying based on (what we can assume) the socially constructed concept of racial distinction and having that perfectly reflect the objective biological distinction.
True. But the author of the study himself did not say that race was genetically determined. That's something that the article you cited added. The author specifically said that racial/ethnic differences may or may not be genetic. I hope you see how that doesn't exactly support your claim.
Quote:
No, but you would end up with a statistically relevant majority of them.
Do you have a source to back that up? Because a majority of black people are not afflicted by sickle cell.
Quote:
If a person can look at only a drop of blood and know nothing else of where that blood came from, and they could tell you whether or not they were black, white, asian or hispanic... how could that still be rooted in social construct?
Can you provide a source showing that race can be determined with extremely high accuracy based on a single drop of blood?
Regardless, it can still be rooted in social construct even if that is true. Just because you can find the differences based on biological tests, does not mean the divisions make biological sense. If we were to divide race on biological divisions, there would likely be far more categories than the few that have been socially established.
Quote:
No, this study was merely trying to show if perceived race lines up with regionally distinct genetic markers (aka race)... and it did that pretty well.
No. He tested similarities between individuals of different races at a few hundred genomic sites to see if individuals of races would be closely grouped together and what stratification would be present.
Quote:
You are misreading what the bold parts are actually saying. It is referring to two types of studies: ones that do not make the superficial distinction and ones that make a genetic distinction as a primary criteria for choosing acceptable candidates or using it as a control/variable.
I don't think so. Read them again.
Quote:
The first bold sentence is poorly worded and I see the possible ambiguity in reading it, but it is simply stating the obvious that the superficial distinction of race may or may not be rooted in genetics.
Yes, exactly. How is something that says your position may or may not be true actually supporting your position?
Quote:
The second bold sentence is simply stating that if you are doing a study and do not make an initial distinction (superficial or genetic) should not be tempted to correlate any discovered distinctions to genetics because they could in fact be caused by other factors.
No, it isn't. Read it again. It is saying that if you find a difference between genetically grouped clusters (so you did make initial distinction based on genetics), which is what a biologically defined race would be, that those differences may not be due to genetics, but instead to myriad other factors.
Quote:
Hell the study is pretty shabby. Would have made more sense to have other people try to determine the peoples race and see how well that lined up with their actual genetic cluster.
I completely disagree. Self-assigned race is the most accurate way to conduct a study like this as people know their own histories better than anyone just looking at them.
Quote:
I wasn't refuting EB, I was refuting your use of it as empirical. It cited no studies and used very vague wording. It even stated that it was a concensus. It contained no science or supporting data.
I never claimed it as empirical. It also didn't use vague wording at all. It quite clearly said: "Because of the overlapping of traits that bear no relationship to one another (such as skin colour and hair texture) and the inability of scientists to cluster peoples into discrete racial packages, modern researchers have concluded that the concept of race has no biological validity."
Whether or not you care to believe it, the Encyclopedia Britannic is typically viewed as an accurate source that is well researched. That is why I used it as evidence, but you are welcome to disregard it if you choose, but I hope you have a reason for doing so other than you just don't trust something that disagrees with your view.
Quote:
Seriously, did you type in "scientists musings on why the feel race is wrong"? These are not studies. This is not empirical. You may as well be citing from "Everybody poops".... well not even, because even that has some scientific validity in it.
I never claimed they were studies. Are you familiar with the concept of a review paper? I specifically looked for review papers, because they are what are typically used to understand scientific opinion on a subject. Individual studies mean relatively little, results have to be reproducible. So I went and found review papers, which cite dozens of papers themselves, to give an overview of the topic. It's not the opinion of one scientist, but of many. Journals ask professors who are well respected in their areas to write review papers, which then fall under a lot of scrutiny, so they are typically well written and accurate.
Do you honestly think that a scientist can just publish a paper with their opinion and no supporting data? Again, individual studies mean little, but groups of studies comprising a body of knowledge mean a lot. That is why a review paper is effective. If you don't believe me, go read the papers I cited and many more, they all cite their sources very well.
Quote:
So while all the scientists that have conducted studies and favored on the Racial naturalist side, they were just myopic racist scientists trying to keep darky down... but all those other scientists writing opinions about their studies to "revise the claim that race is a cultural construct" should be published in the NEJM.
Again, do you honestly believe that the majority scientific opinion was based on opinion and assumptions alone? It most certainly was not. It was based on many, many studies. And no where did I imply that racism had anything to do with this at all, so stop putting words in my mouth.
-------------------- DISCLAIMER: None of the ideas expressed above are actually mine. They are told to me by Luthor and Ferdinand , the five inch tall space aliens who live under my desk. In return for these ideas, I have given them permission to eat any dust bunnies they may find under there.
|
Bigbadwooof
Trumps Bone Spurs



Registered: 12/07/13
Posts: 13,337
Last seen: 58 minutes, 12 seconds
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: SneezingPenis]
#21882407 - 07/01/15 10:52 AM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
meaning that the socially constructed table of making distinctions between organisms doesn't officially recognize a distinction in humans beyond species is proof that no objective distinction can be made.... which is absolutely ludicrous.
The reason your distinctions between organisms (All bearing the same genes) is not officially recognized is because it would be of no use to do so. We have identified different phenotypes within the human race, as with all animals, but there isn't any core genetic varience (ie information added or removed from the genome).
In order to define race, one might attempt to identify groupings of alleles that are expressed concomitantly within several different populaces. However, these would have to be mutually exclusive from one another, generally speaking. This is not the case. It is clearly a continuous spectrum, rather than the rigid discontinuity that your racism suggests.
Also, I don't 'need' to cite sources to make a coherent argument, or to win the semantics game. Sources are only necessary when bold claims are made, which require evidence. You seem to be the one making the bold claims against the integrity of the scientific community, the encyclopedia, and socially accepted positions on this subject. I don't need to invoke the words or mind of someone else to make an argument.
I do not say this with inflammatory or sensational intent, your ideas were once the foundation of the eugenics movement that gave momentum to the Holocaust. Not only have they been deemed erroneous, but they are also dangerous. Your insights are not some new revelation, but the unsavory remnants of a very old poison.
-------------------- "It is no measure of good health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society," - Jiddu Krishnamurti FARTS "There is no need for conspiracy where interests converge" - George Carlin Every one of you should see this video. "If you bombard the earth with photons for a while, it can emit a roadster" - Andrej Kerpathy
 
Edited by Bigbadwooof (07/01/15 10:53 AM)
|
SneezingPenis
ACHOOOOOOOOO!!!!!111!

Registered: 01/15/05
Posts: 15,427
Last seen: 6 years, 8 months
|
Re: A few of my rants regarding SC shooting... [Re: BoldAsLove]
#21883123 - 07/01/15 02:31 PM (8 years, 6 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
BoldAsLove said:
True. But the author of the study himself did not say that race was genetically determined. That's something that the article you cited added. The author specifically said that racial/ethnic differences may or may not be genetic. I hope you see how that doesn't exactly support your claim.
I really don't want to get into a semantic argument over what the author said because opinion has no merit in a debate... but what he said was that not every distinction that is arrived at is fully supported or caused by genetics alone. You are seeing what you want to. If you read it in the entire context it will make more sense.
Quote:
Quote:
No, but you would end up with a statistically relevant majority of them.
Do you have a source to back that up? Because a majority of black people are not afflicted by sickle cell.
That is a logical fallacy... If I say that you took 100 people with Sickle cell traits that they would be overwhelmingly black and you respond with "but if you took 100 black people they wouldn't overwhelmingly have Sickle Cell traits" they have nothing to do with each other. 1 in 500 african-americans (not africans) have SCA and 1 in 12 have sickle cell traits, compared to 1:36,000 for hispanics. This was from the CDC's website and was only based on 7 states. It did not have statistics for white people or asians.
Quote:
Can you provide a source showing that race can be determined with extremely high accuracy based on a single drop of blood?
Does a single drop of blood not contain all of your DNA?
Quote:
Regardless, it can still be rooted in social construct even if that is true. Just because you can find the differences based on biological tests, does not mean the divisions make biological sense. If we were to divide race on biological divisions, there would likely be far more categories than the few that have been socially established.
How can you find an objective testable distinction and it still be a social construct? If that distinction leads to better diagnosis and treatment, how can it not have some measure of validity in a biological sense? (this is getting a little ridiculous that I have to keep putting this out there and it isn't addressed and then coming full circle back to this for about the 5th time.)
Quote:
No, this study was merely trying to show if perceived race lines up with regionally distinct genetic markers (aka race)... and it did that pretty well.
No. He tested similarities between individuals of different races at a few hundred genomic sites to see if individuals of races would be closely grouped together and what stratification would be present.
Yes, if a pattern (or cluster) appears when there is no socially constructed criteria present, and those clusters line up perfectly with the superficial distinctions we make, then there is biological validity.
Quote:
The first bold sentence is poorly worded and I see the possible ambiguity in reading it, but it is simply stating the obvious that the superficial distinction of race may or may not be rooted in genetics.
Yes, exactly. How is something that says your position may or may not be true actually supporting your position?
I have never stated that a superficial distinction is a de facto way of determining race. Our discussion is about whether or not it has biological validity and scientific worth... basically if there is a true, objective distinction of subspecies within humans. It doesn't invalidate my position at all.
Quote:
Quote:
The second bold sentence is simply stating that if you are doing a study and do not make an initial distinction (superficial or genetic) should not be tempted to correlate any discovered distinctions to genetics because they could in fact be caused by other factors.
No, it isn't. Read it again. It is saying that if you find a difference between genetically grouped clusters (so you did make initial distinction based on genetics), which is what a biologically defined race would be, that those differences may not be due to genetics, but instead to myriad other factors.
No, you need to learn how science works. It clearly states that if you are doing a study and you are not using race/ethnicity as part of your initial focus, meaning that you took a group of people and divided them on criteria not based upon ethnic distinctions (superficial or not) and later have findings that do correlate to racial distinction, it would be lazy to then conclude that those clusters or patterns that formed are due to solely genetics... Which is pretty much at the heart of this debate. The modern scientific debate on this has come about because so many anthropologists have made some extremely racist conclusions about the "inferiority of the negro" and such. While there were no real scientific studies done, these were opinion papers written by them and to the weker-minded public was therefor backed scientifically (even though that is a false assumption). The reaction by the scientific community has been to try and do away with that distinction by writing opinion papers parading as scientific rigor.
I have been wondering why you guys have not provided any actual studies that show favor to the social constructionist view of race and I was shocked that there are none.... well not shocked in a post Eugenics society where any study that even mentions race is going to be lauded by the scientific community before it evens gets off the ground and even if it was hypothesizing in favor of social constructionism.
The reason why this is such a hotly contested issue within the scientific community is because it is a scary premise: if we actually find validity in making racial distinctions then it opens the door for a qualitative ranking of races. It is simple: if race doesn't objectively exist, then no one can create a scientific foundation for a grossly unpopular concept like racial superiority.
Quote:
Quote:
Hell the study is pretty shabby. Would have made more sense to have other people try to determine the peoples race and see how well that lined up with their actual genetic cluster.
I completely disagree. Self-assigned race is the most accurate way to conduct a study like this as people know their own histories better than anyone just looking at them.
that isn't how science works. You want to try and decrease as many variables as possible. A person knowing or being wrong about their lineage is a variable that can skew results.
Quote:
Quote:
I wasn't refuting EB, I was refuting your use of it as empirical. It cited no studies and used very vague wording. It even stated that it was a concensus. It contained no science or supporting data.
I never claimed it as empirical. It also didn't use vague wording at all. It quite clearly said: "Because of the overlapping of traits that bear no relationship to one another (such as skin colour and hair texture) and the inability of scientists to cluster peoples into discrete racial packages, modern researchers have concluded that the concept of race has no biological validity."
Whether or not you care to believe it, the Encyclopedia Britannic is typically viewed as an accurate source that is well researched. That is why I used it as evidence, but you are welcome to disregard it if you choose, but I hope you have a reason for doing so other than you just don't trust something that disagrees with your view.
It is accurate.... about the scientific opinion. Might as well cite Encyclopedia Brown for all the weight it carries in this discussion.
Quote:
I never claimed they were studies. Are you familiar with the concept of a review paper? I specifically looked for review papers, because they are what are typically used to understand scientific opinion on a subject. Individual studies mean relatively little, results have to be reproducible. So I went and found review papers, which cite dozens of papers themselves, to give an overview of the topic. It's not the opinion of one scientist, but of many. Journals ask professors who are well respected in their areas to write review papers, which then fall under a lot of scrutiny, so they are typically well written and accurate.
Do you honestly think that a scientist can just publish a paper with their opinion and no supporting data? Again, individual studies mean little, but groups of studies comprising a body of knowledge mean a lot. That is why a review paper is effective. If you don't believe me, go read the papers I cited and many more, they all cite their sources very well.
Then why are you guys asking for more studies from me? especially when you have provided ZERO. Scientific opinion has no merit in this discussion. More often than not, scientific consensus has been grossly wrong about things until real empirical evidence puts the debate to rest. Where is your supporting data? where are any of these scientists supporting data? produce data, not papers.
Quote:
Quote:
So while all the scientists that have conducted studies and favored on the Racial naturalist side, they were just myopic racist scientists trying to keep darky down... but all those other scientists writing opinions about their studies to "revise the claim that race is a cultural construct" should be published in the NEJM.
Again, do you honestly believe that the majority scientific opinion was based on opinion and assumptions alone? It most certainly was not. It was based on many, many studies. And no where did I imply that racism had anything to do with this at all, so stop putting words in my mouth.
then where is it? where are all these studies that all this opinion is "scientifically concluded" from?
-------------------------------------------------------------
So I am getting quite bored with this debate. I will let some of you have a go at the last word unless you actually produce something novel to this discussion.
I urge anyone to read this article from Stanford. Not for paraphrasing and such, but because it gives a really good, blunt, no frills layout of the history and stances of this argument. We could have all saved ourselves some time by just pointing to a school of thought and saying "this is what I believe" an gone about our way... because all this has been exhaustively debated by better and smarter people than us and they are at an impasse still.
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/
What "school" of thought I identified with perfectly was: (really long, doubt many of you will read it)
Quote:
The third school of thought regarding the ontology of race is racial population naturalism. This camp suggests that, although racial naturalism falsely attributed cultural, mental, and physical characters to discrete racial groups, it is possible that genetically significant biological groupings could exist that would merit the term races. Importantly, these biological racial groupings would not be essentialist or discrete: there is no set of genetic or other biological traits that all and only all members of a racial group share that would then provide a natural biological boundary between racial groups. Thus, these thinkers confirm the strong scientific consensus that discrete, essentialist races do not exist. However, the criteria of discreteness and essentialism would also invalidate distinctions between non-human species, such as lions and tigers. As Philip Kitcher puts it, “there is no…genetic feature…that separates one species of mosquito or mushroom from another” (Kitcher 2007, 294–6; Cf. Mallon 2007, 146–168). Rather, biological species are differentiated by reproductive isolation, which is relative, not absolute (since hybrids sometimes appear in nature); which may have non-genetic causes (e.g., geographic separation and incompatible reproduction periods or rituals); which may generate statistically significant if not uniform genetic differences; and which may express distinct phenotypes. In effect, if the failure to satisfy the condition of discreteness and essentialism requires jettisoning the concept of race, then it also requires jettisoning the concept of biological species. But because the biological species concept remains epistemologically useful, some biologists and philosophers use it to defend a racial ontology that is “biologically informed but non-essentialist,” one that is vague, non-discrete, and related to genetics, genealogy, geography, and phenotype (Sesardic 2010, 146).
.....
The question is whether these new biological ontologies of race avoid the conceptual mismatches that ground eliminativism. The short answer is that they can, but only through human intervention. Socially isolated race faces no mismatch when applied to African Americans, defined as the descendants of African slaves brought to the United States. However, this racial category would not encompass black Africans. Moreover, because African American race originated in legally enforced sexual segregation, it is “both biologically real and socially constructed” (Kitcher 2007, 298).
In each case, racial population naturalism encounters problems in trying to demarcate discrete boundaries between different biological populations. If discreteness is indispensable to a human racial taxonomy, then mismatches can only be avoided, if at all, through human intervention. But as noted above, biological species are also not genetically discrete, and thus boundaries between non-human species must also be imposed through human intervention. And just as the demarcation of non-human species is justified through its scientific usefulness, so too are human racial categories justified. For instance, Andreason contends that a cladistic race concept that divides northeastern from southeastern Asians is scientifically useful for evolutionary research, even if it conflicts with the folk concept of a unified Asian race. In turn, the concepts of genetically clustered and socially isolated race may remain useful for detecting and treating some health problems. Ian Hacking provides a careful argument in favor of the provisional use of American racial categories in medicine. Noting that racial categories do not reflect essentialist, uniform differences, he reiterates the finding that there are statistically significant genetic differences among different racial groups. As a result, an African American is more likely to find a bone marrow match from a pool of African American donors than from a pool of white donors. Thus, he defends the practice of soliciting African American bone marrow donors, even though this may provide fodder to racist groups who defend an essentialist and hierarchical conception of biological race (Hacking 2005, 102–116; Cf. Kitcher 2007, 312–316). Conversely, Dorothy Roberts emphasizes the dangers of using racial categories within medicine, suggesting that it not only validates egregious ideas of biological racial hierarchy but also contributes to conservative justifications for limiting race-based affirmative action and even social welfare funding, which supposedly would be wasted on genetically inferior minority populations. In effect, race-based medicine raises the specter of a new political synthesis of colorblind conservatism with biological racialism (Roberts 2008, 537–545). However, Roberts’s critique fails to engage the literature on the statistical significance of racial categories for genetic differences. Moreover, she herself acknowledges that many versions of colorblind conservatism do not rely at all on biological justifications.
|
|