Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Ethnic Traits

Page 1 of 8 [ 120 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Magnus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

04 May 2009, 2:27 am

Is it okay to talk about this sort of thing here?

I mean, if you believe that humans evolved from animals (which of course we did)
why wouldn't we have certain specific traits then? Why wouldn't we at least want to know about our own traits? I guess if we didn't want to know, we wouldn't. Considering it our own, I mean, it seems like such...an oversight, to not at least have this all on document already?


_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.

-Pythagoras


Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 May 2009, 2:52 am

For medical purposes, we do discuss ethnic differences- blacks, for instance, are at a higher risk for heart disease.

For traits such as intelligence or what-have-you, probably cultural and socioeconomic factors are far more influential than ethnicity, and any racially-determined group differences in intelligence (assuming they do exist) are not likely to be significant, since individual differences would be far more pronounced, thus making knowledge of the group differences useless and potentially harmful because of the risk of stigmatization. In short, even if there are differences, it's probably better not to dwell on them. In any case, all different "races" of humans are extremely closely related (and some dispute the notion of race as being inadequately defined) so I wouldn't expect any differences that do exist to be particularly dramatic.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


MissConstrue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,052
Location: MO

04 May 2009, 3:35 am

Orwell wrote:
For medical purposes, we do discuss ethnic differences- blacks, for instance, are at a higher risk for heart disease.

For traits such as intelligence or what-have-you, probably cultural and socioeconomic factors are far more influential than ethnicity, and any racially-determined group differences in intelligence (assuming they do exist) are not likely to be significant, since individual differences would be far more pronounced, thus making knowledge of the group differences useless and potentially harmful because of the risk of stigmatization. In short, even if there are differences, it's probably better not to dwell on them. In any case, all different "races" of humans are extremely closely related (and some dispute the notion of race as being inadequately defined) so I wouldn't expect any differences that do exist to be particularly dramatic.


To me that comes off as a bit of a double standard since we make the same claims regarding intellegence and behavior among genders......some in speculative ways and others, well not so speculative but filled with blanket assumptions and statements.


_________________
I live as I choose or I will not live at all.
~Delores O’Riordan


ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

04 May 2009, 4:02 am

Orwell wrote:
[...]blacks, for instance, are at a higher risk for heart disease[...]

[...]so I wouldn't expect any differences that do exist to be particularly dramatic[...]

[...]In short, even if there are differences, it's probably better not to dwell on them[...]

God bless America!

I expect better from you, Orwell. Have you been drinking?



ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

04 May 2009, 4:06 am

Magnus wrote:
...an oversight, to not at least have this all on document already?

Well, it does seem like that. Unfortunately anyone carry out research in this area faces serious injury or death from leftist nutters, or if in Europe even imprisonment for inciting hatred.



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

04 May 2009, 6:25 am

ascan wrote:
Magnus wrote:
...an oversight, to not at least have this all on document already?

Well, it does seem like that. Unfortunately anyone carry out research in this area faces serious injury or death from leftist nutters, or if in Europe even imprisonment for inciting hatred.


Actually it was rightist nutters who popularized lynching and pogroms. But since I'm not a sports fan I don't follow those action games too closely.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 May 2009, 8:35 am

MissConstrue wrote:
To me that comes off as a bit of a double standard since we make the same claims regarding intellegence and behavior among genders......some in speculative ways and others, well not so speculative but filled with blanket assumptions and statements.

Gender differences are probably overhyped as well, but at least with gender there is a clearer division (males or females) whereas with race, it's a bit harder to define.


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

04 May 2009, 9:05 am

Orwell wrote:
MissConstrue wrote:
To me that comes off as a bit of a double standard since we make the same claims regarding intellegence and behavior among genders......some in speculative ways and others, well not so speculative but filled with blanket assumptions and statements.

Gender differences are probably overhyped as well, but at least with gender there is a clearer division (males or females) whereas with race, it's a bit harder to define.


One rather important point is that there is no way to discern a "pure" racial type. An old ironic remark amongst black people is about how powerful "black" blood is since a drop of it turns a while line into a black one.



Orwell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Aug 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,518
Location: Room 101

04 May 2009, 10:02 am

Sand wrote:
One rather important point is that there is no way to discern a "pure" racial type. An old ironic remark amongst black people is about how powerful "black" blood is since a drop of it turns a while line into a black one.

Anyone else remember the controversy over whether Obama was black enough, or too black? As it turns out, Obama is actually Irish. 8)

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Xkw8ip43Vk[/youtube]


_________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH


ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

04 May 2009, 10:18 am

Sand wrote:
One rather important point is that there is no way to discern a "pure" racial type...

I don't see why that's so important, Sand. Didn't you state in another thread that you don't see the world in a black and white kind of way, but more in terms of probability? Isn't that the way we should look at race and the genetics associated with it? The gene pool from one part of the world will provide a different probability for a person to show a particular characteristic than the gene pool in another. So, innuits are generally often short and stockly, Africans are tall and lean. You can do a similar thing with skin colour, and for susceptibility to certain diseases. If you have relationships between people from different continents the outcome is still probability based.



Fuzzy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2006
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,223
Location: Alberta Canada

04 May 2009, 10:20 am

ascan wrote:
Magnus wrote:
...an oversight, to not at least have this all on document already?

Well, it does seem like that. Unfortunately anyone carry out research in this area faces serious injury or death from leftist nutters, or if in Europe even imprisonment for inciting hatred.


Depends. Nobody squabbles over the genetic diseases of the Ashkenazi Jews.


_________________
davidred wrote...
I installed Ubuntu once and it completely destroyed my paying relationship with Microsoft.


Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

04 May 2009, 11:03 am

ascan wrote:
Sand wrote:
One rather important point is that there is no way to discern a "pure" racial type...

I don't see why that's so important, Sand. Didn't you state in another thread that you don't see the world in a black and white kind of way, but more in terms of probability? Isn't that the way we should look at race and the genetics associated with it? The gene pool from one part of the world will provide a different probability for a person to show a particular characteristic than the gene pool in another. So, innuits are generally often short and stockly, Africans are tall and lean. You can do a similar thing with skin colour, and for susceptibility to certain diseases. If you have relationships between people from different continents the outcome is still probability based.


The concept of probability application in this instance would be on firmer ground if there was some absolute concordance between racial identifiers and medical inclinations. I sincerely doubt there is a way that a modulated skin color has direct relationship to, say, sickle cell anemia. There is a multiple group of so-called racial characteristics and how they group or disappear in any individual is likely to defeat any probability calculation.



ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

04 May 2009, 3:44 pm

Sand wrote:
The concept of probability application in this instance would be on firmer ground if there was some absolute concordance between racial identifiers and medical inclinations. I sincerely doubt there is a way that a modulated skin color has direct relationship to, say, sickle cell anemia. There is a multiple group of so-called racial characteristics and how they group or disappear in any individual is likely to defeat any probability calculation.

Not at all. Probability can be assigned within a range, or an anticipated margin of error. In the simplest sense, one could say most Africans have dark skin. That's a very basic use of probability. Of course, I'm not a mathematician, so perhaps one could word that more suitably. Anyway, I think it illustrates the point. Moreover, it's fairly widely accepted that certain diseases are more prevalent amongst those who belong to, or at least who indentify themselves with, a certain race or ethnicity.

To illustrate my point further, I've linked, below, to a paper from Nature Genetics Supplement. Note the following points:

"Increasing scientific evidence, however, indicates that genetic variation can be used to make a reasonably accurate prediction of geographic origins of an individual..."

"The undeniable existence of health disparities indicates that there is a correlation between self-identified race or ethnicity and health or disease in some cases"

There are, obviously, caveats to those points. But at least it's an honest appraisal, not the kind of liberal crap peddled by governments who choose to ignore, ridicule, or censor opinions they find inconvenient.

http://www.genome.gov/Pages/News/Documents/RaceandGeneticsCommentary.pdf



Sand
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Sep 2007
Age: 100
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,484
Location: Finland

04 May 2009, 3:49 pm

ascan wrote:
Sand wrote:
The concept of probability application in this instance would be on firmer ground if there was some absolute concordance between racial identifiers and medical inclinations. I sincerely doubt there is a way that a modulated skin color has direct relationship to, say, sickle cell anemia. There is a multiple group of so-called racial characteristics and how they group or disappear in any individual is likely to defeat any probability calculation.

Not at all. Probability can be assigned within a range, or an anticipated margin of error. In the simplest sense, one could say most Africans have dark skin. That's a very basic use of probability. Of course, I'm not a mathematician, so perhaps one could word that more suitably. Anyway, I think it illustrates the point. Moreover, it's fairly widely accepted that certain diseases are more prevalent amongst those who belong to, or at least who indentify themselves with, a certain race or ethnicity.

To illustrate my point further, I've linked, below, to a paper from Nature Genetics Supplement. Note the following points:

"Increasing scientific evidence, however, indicates that genetic variation can be used to make a reasonably accurate prediction of geographic origins of an individual..."

"The undeniable existence of health disparities indicates that there is a correlation between self-identified race or ethnicity and health or disease in some cases"

There are, obviously, caveats to those points. But at least it's an honest appraisal, not the kind of liberal crap peddled by governments who choose to ignore, ridicule, or censor opinions they find inconvenient.

http://www.genome.gov/Pages/News/Documents/RaceandGeneticsCommentary.pdf


Although the concept may have statistical validity individuals are so mixed in parental origins that validity dilutes and basically disappears in individuals.



ascan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2005
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,194
Location: Taunton/Aberdeen

04 May 2009, 4:10 pm

Sand wrote:
Although the concept may have statistical validity individuals are so mixed in parental origins that validity dilutes and basically disappears in individuals.

But people aren't generally mixed in parental origins, Sand. My parents, and their parents, all come from Wales, SW England, or Ireland, for example. Of course, it's true that politicians are trying to destroy that kind of thing with mass immigration from third world dumps, but as of now most people in the UK, I'd suggest, have predominantly white northern European ancestry.



Magnus
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,372
Location: Claremont, California

04 May 2009, 7:53 pm

ascan wrote:

Quote:

Well, it does seem like that. Unfortunately anyone carry out research in this area faces serious injury or death from leftist nutters, or if in Europe even imprisonment for inciting hatred.


I remember reading about a scientist who wrote a book about ethnic traits and his reputation was ruined. I don't understand why we can't be realistic about these things. Although, as Sand pointed out there is so much inter mingling that it doesn't matter. In cases where there is "pure" blood, I do notice certain traits. Of course it's all generalizing. But isn't that what we do in zoology and behavioral sciences?

Do you think some races are funnier than others. Some races seem to be more serious and I don't think it's all cultural because when they come to the US and adopt our culture, they still retain specific traits.

I know people have yelled at me before for comparing humans to dogs. I've met some dog enthusiasts who get pretty upset at labeling breeds too. There is an exception to every rule, but I just don't see the value in overlooking the obvious for the sake of politeness when there are serious scientific gains to be made in understanding evolutionary behavior. I think we do differ in temperament, intelligence, perceptiveness, hostility, etc., Why is this? Why aren't they trying to figure out what is in our genes that causes specific traits?


_________________
As long as man continues to be the ruthless destroyer of lower living beings he will never know health or peace. For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other.

-Pythagoras