|
|
Post by ProfessorFate on May 31, 2021 0:48:43 GMT -8
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on May 31, 2021 6:11:58 GMT -8
I'm not sure I understand the purpose of those questions. If you breed a horse with a donkey you get a mule. That doesn't mean horses and donkeys don't exist, or that they are just social constructs.
|
|
Bick
Administrator 
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on May 31, 2021 8:09:27 GMT -8
Because there is so much mixture of race, the biology of which race a person belongs to gets blurred to the point of being indistinguishable. Do you disagree with this?
What do you get when you breed an elephant and a rhino? Elephino.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on May 31, 2021 10:06:46 GMT -8
Because there is so much mixture of race, the biology of which race a person belongs to gets blurred to the point of being indistinguishable. Of course races get blurred as races intermix gene pools. That's a given. But it does not contradict the fact that races exist -- in fact they existed long before racism did. This "debate" should be about racism, not race. Otherwise, we might not get past claiming "races exist, no they don't, yes they do, no they don't". |
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on May 31, 2021 16:12:50 GMT -8
Sure there are distinct biological races, and in some parts of the world, it's pretty easy to see who belongs to what race. But for the purpose of this debate as it relates to America, it is damn near impossible to use biology as the differentiator. Hence the social construct argument.
In a way, it's similar to the fluid gender argument, except THAT one actually is determined by biology.
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on May 31, 2021 18:04:01 GMT -8
But for the purpose of this debate as it relates to America, it is damn near impossible to use biology as the differentiator. Hence the social construct argument. In a way, it's similar to the fluid gender argument, except THAT one actually is determined by biology. Yes, but because it's difficult or impossible to use biology as the differentiator doesn't mean biology isn't the differentiator. As I said in my earlier response, there are physical and socio-cultural differences between races, and the physical differences are largely biological. The social construct element is what confuses the issue. When it is politically correct for a person who is 1/8 black, or 1/16, or 1/32, or 1/64, or has one drop of black blood in his veins, to call himself black, and therefore qualify as a protected group and eligible for affirmative action, phony sympathy, and (Heaven forbid) reparations, that's when problems and resentments arise. Just as we need to differentiate between race and racism, we also need to draw a distinction between institutional (i.e. established or protected by law) racism and personal racism. The former has been largely eliminated by laws making it illegal. The latter is not so easy to overcome. There have been people who mistrusted, feared or hated those that don't look, sound or act like themselves since the dawn of man. Perhaps it's normal human nature, but more importantly, those kinds or personal biases cannot be cured by legislation or ostracizing those who hold those views. |
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Jun 1, 2021 4:46:47 GMT -8
But for the purpose of this debate as it relates to America, it is damn near impossible to use biology as the differentiator. Hence the social construct argument. In a way, it's similar to the fluid gender argument, except THAT one actually is determined by biology. Yes, but because it's difficult or impossible to use biology as the differentiator doesn't mean biology isn't the differentiator. As I said in my earlier response, there are physical and socio-cultural differences between races, and the physical differences are largely biological. The social construct element is what confuses the issue. When it is politically correct for a person who is 1/8 black, or 1/16, or 1/32, or 1/64, or has one drop of black blood in his veins, to call himself black, and therefore qualify as a protected group and eligible for affirmative action, phony sympathy, and (Heaven forbid) reparations, that's when problems and resentments arise. Just as we need to differentiate between race and racism, we also need to draw a distinction between institutional (i.e. established or protected by law) racism and personal racism. The former has been largely eliminated by laws making it illegal. The latter is not so easy to overcome. There have been people who mistrusted, feared or hated those that don't look, sound or act like themselves since the dawn of man. Perhaps it's normal human nature, but more importantly, those kinds or personal biases cannot be cured by legislation or ostracizing those who hold those views. We'd sure like to think so, wouldn't we. But, sadly, that is not the case in many...possibly most organizations. Oh, there is nothing written in the HR handbooks of course, but African American families are much less able to create wealth for themselves than their white counterparts: (from The Roots of the Widening Racial Wealth Gap: Explaining the Black-White Economic Divide, by Thomas Shapiro, Tatjana Meschede, Sam Osoro) and (from an abstract of Access to Health and Health Care: How Race and Ethnicity Matter, by Lynne D. Richardson MD, FACEP, Marlaina Norris MD) We cannot discount the prevalence of institutional racism in today's environment. I submit, since the advent of Barack Obama "dealing with ir" followed by the creation of Antifa and BLM protests, it has gotten worse. |
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Jun 1, 2021 6:27:10 GMT -8
Wealth gaps have many causes, so why do we automatically kneejerk to the conclusion that the wealth gap is due to racism? How much of that gap is caused by the reality that roughly 70% to 80% of African-American children grow up in a home without a father, often missing out on the discipline, respect and accountability a father's presence may have engendered in them?
For what it's worth, I also have a wealth gap with Lebron James, Serena Williams, and Drake. Is it entirely due to institutional racism?
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Jun 1, 2021 6:37:56 GMT -8
But for the purpose of this debate as it relates to America, it is damn near impossible to use biology as the differentiator. Hence the social construct argument. In a way, it's similar to the fluid gender argument, except THAT one actually is determined by biology. Yes, but because it's difficult or impossible to use biology as the differentiator doesn't mean biology isn't the differentiator. As I said in my earlier response, there are physical and socio-cultural differences between races, and the physical differences are largely biological. The social construct element is what confuses the issue. When it is politically correct for a person who is 1/8 black, or 1/16, or 1/32, or 1/64, or has one drop of black blood in his veins, to call himself black, and therefore qualify as a protected group and eligible for affirmative action, phony sympathy, and (Heaven forbid) reparations, that's when problems and resentments arise. Just as we need to differentiate between race and racism, we also need to draw a distinction between institutional (i.e. established or protected by law) racism and personal racism. The former has been largely eliminated by laws making it illegal. The latter is not so easy to overcome. There have been people who mistrusted, feared or hated those that don't look, sound or act like themselves since the dawn of man. Perhaps it's normal human nature, but more importantly, those kinds or personal biases cannot be cured by legislation or ostracizing those who hold those views. I agree with your points that the various incentives of claiming membership in certain groups offer benefits that non members would not be entitled to. Believe me, I've lived it as a mixed race guy myself. The fact is, however, they did not create those incentives, but instead are taking advantage of them like anyone else would from taxpayers to private HS football teams. But let's set that aside for now and focus on your biology argument. By race, are you referring to Linnaeus' classifications? Europaeus albus: European white Americanus rubescens: American reddish Asiaticus fuscus: Asian tawny Africanus niger: African black |
|
davidsf
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 5,252
|
Post by davidsf on Jun 1, 2021 10:45:58 GMT -8
Wealth gaps have many causes, so why do we automatically kneejerk to the conclusion that the wealth gap is due to racism? How much of that gap is caused by the reality that roughly 70% to 80% of African-American children grow up in a home without a father, often missing out on the discipline, respect and accountability a father's presence may have engendered in them? For what it's worth, I also have a wealth gap with Lebron James, Serena Williams, and Drake. Is it entirely due to institutional racism? You're looking for an argument that doesn't exist. I offered that article as evidence that we are not over racism just yet. Had you read then article instead of just reacting to that snippet, you would have seen other evidences of racism-that-is-not-acknowledged like red-lining that is still being done, just under a different name. |
|
SK80
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 7,376
|
Post by SK80 on Jun 2, 2021 8:48:51 GMT -8
And so this thread went exactly as I suspected in my only posting..
This sums it up right...., thnx bro now I don’t have to chime in.....!
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakley on Jun 3, 2021 16:19:36 GMT -8
My device makes it impossible to link this article or it could also be my ignorance. In any case, I encourage you all to look it up and read it.
It is on American thinker.com
May 24, 2021
No Race Has Ever Done More For Another Race Than White Americans Have Done For Black Americans
by Vasko Kohlmayer
I would appreciate your thoughts.
|
|
|
|
Post by Oakley on Jun 3, 2021 16:22:10 GMT -8
BTW davidsf, your arguments suck.
|
|
Bick
Administrator
Posts: 6,900
|
Post by Bick on Jun 4, 2021 6:02:45 GMT -8
I asked a conservative friend of mine about the biology of race, and he thought race was also biological. When I pressed him for the origins of race, he had pretty much the same response as in getting here...no real idea.
Absent any argument to the contrary of substance, can we stipulate that race might be more of a social construct today, and move forward on this?
|
|
MDDad
Master Eminence Grise
Posts: 6,814
|
Post by MDDad on Jun 4, 2021 6:26:18 GMT -8
Absent any argument to the contrary of substance, can we stipulate that race might be more of a social construct today, and move forward on this? Absoutely not. If we can't prove that human beings evolved from single-celled organisms, or were put on earth through the hand of God, we don't stipulate that they came from Mars. One thing biology has shown us is that when you take any species of animal and disperse it over the planet into differing physical environments, they develop different physical characteristics as favorable genetic variations begin to predominate in their particular environment. One-humped Arabian camels and two-humped Bactrian camels, or African and Asian elephants, or polar, grizzly and black bears, and hundreds of other examples all stemmed from a single common ancestor but developed into different "races" over time through genetic isolation and the natural selection for favorable traits. The Galapagos Islands and Darwinism are evidence of this. |
|
