The Urban Myth, DNA, Race.

Abortion, euthanasia, genetic engineering, Just War theory and other such hot topics.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The Urban Myth, DNA, Race.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Harbal wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: You can call them people, and treat them as you would any other human.
I was asking what name we should give to the difference. "Race" seems like a more human term than "subspecies".
I don't know why that's funny but you manage it. I have a feeling Hobbes wouldn't approve of either.

Interesting article:

http://time.com/91081/what-science-says ... -genetics/

It seems to me that the 'races don't exist' concept is a pathetic attempt by the terribly PC to somehow end racism. You can't stop people from noticing differences in groups of people, so scientists can rabbit on about 'genomes' all they want. Hardly anyone knows or cares what that is anyway. Most people who mention 'race' aren't thinking about biology. Apparently 'ethnicity' is perfectly ok with the PC. It fits nicely into their 'safe space'.
To claim that something doesn't exist, you have to first define what it is that 'doesn't exist'.
According to Wiki: Race is the classification of humans into groups based on physical traits, ancestry, genetics or social relations, or the relations between them (nothing about genomes there).
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Urban Myth, DNA, Race.

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote: FFS. 'Race' never had a 'meaning' anyway. It means whatever we want to ascribe to it. Nor does 'species'. We are all just atoms whirling around the universe.
"Race" does have meaning. Words are important. choice and application structure thinking. Race is a really good example of how damaging an agenda can be.
I thought you just said 'race' doesn't have meaning.
"Poseidon" has meaning."Fairies" have meaning, and "god" has meaning.
User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8364
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: The Urban Myth, DNA, Race.

Post by Hobbes' Choice »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Harbal wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: You can call them people, and treat them as you would any other human.
I was asking what name we should give to the difference. "Race" seems like a more human term than "subspecies".
I don't know why that's funny but you manage it. I have a feeling Hobbes wouldn't approve of either.

Interesting article:

http://time.com/91081/what-science-says ... -genetics/
.
The article broadly supports my position. Maybe you are too fucked up to read it properly?
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 13983
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The Urban Myth, DNA, Race.

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
vegetariantaxidermy wrote:
Harbal wrote: I was asking what name we should give to the difference. "Race" seems like a more human term than "subspecies".
I don't know why that's funny but you manage it. I have a feeling Hobbes wouldn't approve of either.

Interesting article:

http://time.com/91081/what-science-says ... -genetics/
.
The article broadly supports my position. Maybe you are too fucked up to read it properly?
Which parts? You could copy-paste them (love the use of 'broadly' :) )
User avatar
Conde Lucanor
Posts: 846
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am

Re: The Urban Myth, DNA, Race.

Post by Conde Lucanor »

RWStanding wrote: There can be little or no doubt that if all countries in this world today were entirely 'open' it would have, and even as matters stand, will have, drastic consequences in purely DNA terms Those countries that are most populated, and those with least population control, will dominate the world's DNA. Small national groups, unless they behave like the Hebrew-Jews over ages, and are not 'open' will be lost in the mix.
A country, in the modern concept of the word, refers to a political entity, a nation-state, comprising a territory, a population that resides inside that territory, having a government, a set of laws, etc. As it is more an "artificial", cultural entity, than a natural one, it is not defined by DNA or racial typologies. So I don't see how is it that some countries will dominate the world's DNA because of racial diversity.

RWStanding wrote:In the short term, there will be great racial diversity in Europe, Americas, and elsewhere. This will be a passing froth. In the longer term, across the world, there will be a varied hybrid human race of Sino-Afro-Eurasians.
It sounds as if, right now, there were genetically isolated populations in Europe and America, made of a pure, unmixed race, and then later there will not be. The fact is there's already racial diversity in most cosmopolitan countries, precisely because they are less isolated.
Post Reply