Pages: 1 2 3 4  Next -- Posted by Headst0ck at 4:12 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 When you think in terms of race...do you truly believe there is a black gene, a white gene, and an asian gene that all makes us different as far as our physical, mental, and personality capabilities go? Do you truly believe race is a fact of biology? Could race just be a concept created by people to hinder any sort of unification of all humans? -- Posted by babygurl 2008 at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 No -- Posted by La Motta at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Ah people are people, they're all the same regardless of what they look like... -- Posted by AcidSilence at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 I dunno. there has got to be something different in the dna of each race i would think.. -- Posted by The Artful Dodger at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Social definately. I mean, there's so many genetic/biological aspects to draw the line with that are ignored within the respective 'races' anyway. -- Posted by Hontoshimu at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 either way theres something and considering white+black=half way id say its in genetics somewhere -- Posted by Candy Man at 4:15 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 We obviously have differances in mentally and physical features. Niggers r killerz! hahaha -- Posted by Headst0ck at 4:15 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from babygurl 2008 at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 No What the hell? That doesn't even answer my question....if you're not going to take the post seriously don't post. I asked if you believe if race is a social concept or a biological one. Take time to think before responding please. -- Posted by the real anti christ at 4:15 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Since all races have attributes which are genetic aside from color then I would have to say yes. -- Posted by playboyfreak456 at 4:16 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Well considering you get your race from your parent, then there is 'race gene.' But as far as personality, that is what society makes you think certain races are to act a certain way. We cal them stereotypes. -- Posted by NikkiMikki at 4:16 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 I think all races might be a tad bit different.. or we'd all be the same race wouldn't we? But it doesn't matter. We're all humans. -- Posted by babygurl 2008 at 4:17 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 7:15 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from babygurl 2008 at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 No What the hell? That doesn't even answer my question....if you're not going to take the post seriously don't post. I asked if you believe if race is a social concept or a biological one. Take time to think before responding please. and I answered No it does not. -- Posted by Headst0ck at 4:17 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Hontoshimu at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 either way theres something and considering white+black=half way id say its in genetics somewhere Equals halfway in terms of what? What some person says? The white man's guide to the one-drop rule? Or do scientists do a blood test and determine whether or not said person has 50% Black and 50% white? I don't believe doing that is even possible. -- Posted by Headst0ck at 4:19 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from babygurl 2008 at 4:17 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 7:15 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from babygurl 2008 at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 No    What the hell? That doesn't even answer my question....if you're not going to take the post seriously don't post.    I asked if you believe if race is a social concept or a biological one. Take time to think before responding please. and I answered No it does not. The question is not structured to answer with a yes or no, the question is structured with options. A) A social concept B) A biological concept Therefore, in order to answer said question...you must pick an option. Jesus I wonder how you answer multiple choice in school. -- Posted by Headst0ck at 4:20 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from playboyfreak456 at 4:16 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Well considering you get your race from your parent, then there is 'race gene.' But as far as personality, that is what society makes you think certain races are to act a certain way. We cal them stereotypes. But what determines race? Our physical appearance and it just stops there? -- Posted by AcidSilence at 4:23 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 4:20 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from playboyfreak456 at 4:16 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Well considering you get your race from your parent, then there is 'race gene.' But as far as personality, that is what society makes you think certain races are to act a certain way. We cal them stereotypes. But what determines race? Our physical appearance and it just stops there? Well if you think about it all.... Take the african american race. For the most part, they have close-knit families. Latino, They are sometimes very religious. There are alot of things that occur repeatedly in each race. -- Posted by fhsyearbook1 at 4:23 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 if it isn't genetics then i want to know what it is -- Posted by MixedDelight at 4:23 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Your skin color has nothing to do with your mental aptitude. -- Posted by Reasonable Doubt at 4:27 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from playboyfreak456 at 4:16 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Well considering you get your race from your parent, then there is 'race gene.' But as far as personality, that is what society makes you think certain races are to act a certain way. We cal them stereotypes. ^ Agreed -- Posted by babygurl 2008 at 4:28 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 7:19 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from babygurl 2008 at 4:17 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 7:15 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from babygurl 2008 at 4:14 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 No   What the hell? That doesn't even answer my question....if you're not going to take the post seriously don't post.   I asked if you believe if race is a social concept or a biological one. Take time to think before responding please.    and I answered No it does not. The question is not structured to answer with a yes or no, the question is structured with options. A) A social concept B) A biological concept Therefore, in order to answer said question...you must pick an option. Jesus I wonder how you answer multiple choice in school. You ask if  people believe  there's  a black gene, a white gene, and a Asian gene that makes us different.  I answered your damn question. so Stfu, with that shit, If you going to ask questions make sure you know exactly your asking. -- Posted by Headst0ck at 4:29 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from AcidSilence at 4:23 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 4:20 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from playboyfreak456 at 4:16 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Well considering you get your race from your parent, then there is 'race gene.' But as far as personality, that is what society makes you think certain races are to act a certain way. We cal them stereotypes.    But what determines race? Our physical appearance and it just stops there? Well if you think about it all.... Take the african american race. For the most part, they have close-knit families. Latino, They are sometimes very religious. There are alot of things that occur repeatedly in each race. True....just like whites are disturbingly suicidal. Are you telling me biology plays a role in all of this? Could it be the social pressure that keeps most of these stereotypes prevalent? Even the enviroment? What could be causing such an increase in insecurity amongst the white community? I don't believe biology perpetuates all of this. I don't have a tight-knit family in fact I'm staying alone in my apartment this thanksgiving. -- Posted by playboyfreak456 at 4:57 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 7:20 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from playboyfreak456 at 4:16 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Well considering you get your race from your parent, then there is 'race gene.' But as far as personality, that is what society makes you think certain races are to act a certain way. We cal them stereotypes. But what determines race? Our physical appearance and it just stops there? Your physical appearance you get from your parents, so you get it from your genes. -- Posted by Headst0ck at 4:59 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Exactly...so if you're just defining race in terms of physical appearance then it doesn't make sense since you get that from your parents. So what defines race then? -- Posted by kidd rune at 5:13 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Race as a Biological Concept By J. Philippe Rushton November 4, 1996 Professor Phillippe Rushton of the University of Western Ontario has released the following statement on race, in response to attempts to discredit the very concept of race and to argue that race "has no validity as a biological concept when applied to man." We are pleased to make a copy of this important statement available to our readers. Discussion of "race" shows little sign of diminishing, despite efforts to deconstruct the concept. Deconstructing the concept of race not only conflicts with people's tendency to classify and build family histories according to common descent but also ignores the work of biologists studying non-human species. Ever since 1758, when the Swedish naturalist Carolus Linnaeus created the classification system still used in biology today, most zoologists have recognized at least the four human subdivisions Linnaeus delineated: Asians, American Indians, Europeans, and Africans. (Technically, some would group the first two Linnaean subdivisions together, thus yielding three major races, often termed, mongoloids, caucasoids, and negroids.) Such high-level classifications do not rule out making finer, hierarchical subdivisions within these major groups. A race is what zoologists term a variety or subdivision of a species. Each race (or variety) is characterized by a more or less distinct combination of inherited morphological, behavioral, physiological traits. In flowers, insects, and non-human mammals, zoologists consistently and routinely study the process of racial differentiation. Formation of a new race takes place when, over several generations, individuals in one group reproduce more frequently among themselves than they do with individuals in other groups. This process is most apparent when the individuals live in diverse geographic areas and therefore evolve unique, recognizable adaptations (such as skin color) that are advantageous in their specific environments. But differentiation also occurs under less extreme circumstances. Zoologists and evolutionists refer to such differentiated populations as races. (Within the formal taxonomic nomenclature of biology, races are termed subspecies). Zoologists have identified two or more races (subspecies) in most mammalian species. Unless one is a religious fundamentalist and believes that man was created in the image and likeness of God, it is foolish to believe that human beings are exempt from biological classification and the laws of evolution that apply to all other life forms. Of course, individuals vary greatly within each racial group and should be treated as such. Nonetheless, much has been learned by studying the statistical differences between the various human races. In my book Race, Evolution, and Behavior (1995, Transaction Publishers), as well as in other recent writings (e.g., the February 1996 issue of Current Anthropology), I review the behavioral, morphological, and physiological differences between the three major human races -- mongoloid, caucasoid, and negroid -- and show that these statistical differences are constant across both historical time, national boundaries, and political and economic systems. Here I will briefly summarize the findings. Asians and Africans consistently aggregate at opposite ends, with Europeans intermediate, on a continuum that includes over 60 anatomical and social variables. These 60 variables include brain size, intelligence, sexual habits, fertility, personality, temperament, speed of maturation, and longevity. If race were an arbitrary, socially-constructed concept, devoid of all biological meaning, such consistent relationships would not exist. Those objecting to the concept of race argue that the taxonomic definitions are arbitrary and subjective. Although critics are correct to point out that the variation within each race is extremely large, that there is disagreement as to exactly how many races there are, and that there is a blurring of category edges because of admixture, they are in error when they claim that classifications are arbitrary. For example, race-critic Jared Diamond, in the 1994 issue of Discover magazine, surveyed half a dozen geographically variable traits and formed very different races depending on which traits he picked. Classifying people using anti-malarial genes, lactose tolerance, fingerprint patterns, or skin color resulted in the Swedes of Europe being placed in the same category as the Xhosa and Fulani of Africa, the Ainu of Japan, and the Italians of Europe. Jared Diamond's classifications, however, are arbitrary and nonsensical because they have little, if any, predictive value beyond the initial classification. More significantly, they confuse the scientific meaning of race, that is, a recognizable (or distinguishable) geographic population. In everyday life, as in evolutionary biology, a "negroid" is someone whose ancestors were born in sub-Saharan Africa, and likewise for a "caucasoid" and a "mongoloid." This definition fits with the temporal bounds offered by the best current theory of human evolution. Thus, since Homo sapiens first appeared in Africa about 200,000 years ago, branched off into Europe about 110,000 years ago, and into Asia 70,000 years after that, a "negroid" is someone whose ancestors, between 4,000 and (to accommodate recent migrations) 20 generations ago, were born in sub-Saharan Africa -- and likewise, for a caucasoid and a mongoloid. Social definitions -- that is, self-identification and other-identification actually accord quite well with the physical evidence. Mongoloids, caucasoids, and negroids can be distinguished on the basis of obvious differences in skeletal morphology, hair and facial features, as well by blood groups and DNA fingerprints. Forensic anthropologists regularly classify skeletons of decomposed bodies by race. For example, narrow nasal passages and a short distance between eye sockets identify a caucasoid person, distinct cheekbones characterize a mongoloid person, and nasal openings shaped like an upside down heart typify a negroid person. In certain criminal investigations, the race of a perpetrator can be identified from blood, semen, and hair samples. To deny the predictive validity of race at this level is nonscientific and unrealistic. The mean pattern of educational and economic achievement within multi-racial countries such as Canada and the United States has increasingly been found to prove valid internationally. For example, it is not often recognized, perhaps because it contradicts the politically correct theories that intelligence is purely a matter of socio-economic conditions, that Asian-Americans and Asians in Asia often outscore white Americans and white Europeans on IQ tests and on tests of educational achievement (even though the tests were largely developed by Europeans and white Americans for use in a Euro-American culture). Blacks in the Caribbean, Britain, Canada and sub-Saharan Africa as well as in the United States have low IQ scores relative to whites. For violent crime, analyses of INTERPOL data from the 1980s and 1990s show the same international distribution that occurs within the United States (that is, Asians least, Europeans in the middle, and Africans most). A similar racial gradient is found both within the U.S. and globally for measures of sexual activity and frequencies of sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS (based on World Health Organization data). One neurohormonal contributor to crime and reproductive behavior is testosterone. Studies show that black college students and military veterans have 3% to 19% more testosterone than their white counterparts. The Japanese have even lower amounts than whites. Sex hormones are circulated throughout the body and are known to activate many brain-behavior systems involving aggression and reproduction. For example, around the world the rate of dizygotic twinning per 1,000 births (caused by a double ovulation), is less than 4 among Asians, 8 among Europeans, and 16 or greater among Africans. The differences in multiple birthing are known to be heritable through the race of the mother regardless of the race of the father, as found in Asian/European matings in Hawaii and European/African matings in Brazil. Publication of The Bell Curve brought widespread public attention to the research on race that has been accumulating over the last 30 years in technical and specialist journals that demonstrably challenges each and every article of the dogma of biological egalitarianism. Startling, and alarming to many, is the conclusion that follows from these data that if all people were treated the same, most average race differences would not disappear. With egalitarianism under siege, there has been a major effort to get the "race genie" back in the bottle, to squeeze the previously tabooed toothpaste back into the tube, to suppress or deny the latest scientific evidence on race, genetics, and behavior. Regardless of the extent to which the media promote "politically correct," but scientifically wrong, resolutions from professional societies such as the American Anthropological Association, facts remain facts and require appropriate scientific, not political, explanation. On average, the Chinese, Koreans, and Japanese are more similar to each other and are different from Australians, Israelis and the Swedes, who in turn are similar to each other and are different from Nigerians, Kenyans, and Jamaicans. None of this should be construed as meaning that environmental factors play no part individual development. But with each passing year and each new study, the evidence for the genetic contribution to individual and group differences becomes more firmly established than ever. About the Author J. Philippe Rushton is a John Simon Guggenheim Fellow and a professor of psychology at the University of Western Ontario in London, Ontario N6A 5C2 Canada. He holds two doctorates from the University of London (PhD and DSc) and is a Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and of the American, British, and Canadian Psychological Associations. His latest book Race, Evolution, and Behavior (1995, Transaction Publishers, telephone 908-445-2280) details the theories and data summarized in this article. A nice read ^^^ -- Posted by the real anti christ at 5:25 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 6:29 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 True....just like whites are disturbingly suicidal. Are you telling me biology plays a role in all of this? Could it be the social pressure that keeps most of these stereotypes prevalent? Even the enviroment? What could be causing such an increase in insecurity amongst the white community? I don't believe biology perpetuates all of this. I don't have a tight-knit family in fact I'm staying alone in my apartment this thanksgiving. Because white people live in the same areas as other white people it would be impossible to determine if suicidal tendencies are environmental. Statistics show Asian countries have higher suicide rates. -- Posted by Headst0ck at 5:26 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 (To Kidd's Article Post) I read that whole thing and saw absolutely no proof...just the same rehashed race and biology study. The only valid truth on there is the ability to find someone's race based off physical appearance...but I've already asked the question...is that all we're basing race off of? Blacks on the negative extreme spectrum/ white in between (how convenient)/ and asians on a positive extreme spectrum. Blacks (Physically Superior, work horses) Whites (Adequate and Moderate in all areas) Asians (Physically inferior, braniacs) Can you link me to actual proof of someone finding out a person's race from collecting semen and/or blood? -- Posted by Afu at 5:27 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 its both -- Posted by Headst0ck at 5:30 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Afu at 5:27 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 its both Can you explain in more detail why you think it's both? -- Posted by Headst0ck at 5:33 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from the real anti christ at 5:25 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 Quote: from Headst0ck at 6:29 pm on Sep. 25, 2008  True....just like whites are disturbingly suicidal.    Are you telling me biology plays a role in all of this? Could it be the social pressure that keeps most of these stereotypes prevalent? Even the enviroment? What could be causing such an increase in insecurity amongst the white community? I don't believe biology perpetuates all of this.    I don't have a tight-knit family in fact I'm staying alone in my apartment this thanksgiving. Because white people live in the same areas as other white people it would be impossible to determine if suicidal tendencies are environmental. Statistics show Asian countries have higher suicide rates. Well that wasn't necessarily my point, my point was  could biology play a part in a collective group (race) performing different things? Or is it a social issue? -- Posted by classicalandrew at 5:39 pm on Sep. 25, 2008 there was a study that genes don't discriminate - so...black guy could be more genetically identical to asian than another black guy Pages: 1 2 3 4  Next