Times like these...

[Pokesan]

this isn't even 20th century racism. you're endorsing 1800s garbage nonsense.

what the fuck is wrong with you

[Lune]

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Genetics can affect skin color, muscle composition, bone density, bone shape, bone size, jaw shape, skull shape, blood cell shape, blood composition, eye color, hair color, hair proliferation, size of genitalia, hormonal balance, and most important to this conversation, brain size, brain structure, and IQ. But oh no, to suggest that behavior, which is wholly a function of the human brain (unless you're a dualist), could possibly be influenced by genetics, that's just crazy talk!

I think the common argument is that these genetic traits aren't uniformly grouped between different populations of humans, because there tends to be just as much genetic variation within what we consider a race as there is between them. Things like IQ and brain size are also muddled by nutrition, poverty, etc.

Of course, it's not a very sound argument, especially when you have traits like hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, and fused rhomboid muscles that are highly clustered within otherwise "genetically diverse" populations within a single racial construct. Genetics are allowed to affect behavior in dogs, but not in humans apparently... golden retrievers and labrador retrievers have different nuances in their personality, yet are extremely genetically similar.

And talking about the implications of this, I'd be willing to bet culture is still 90% responsible for behavior. If you credit genetics for the success and prosperity (or failure) of a race, it's hard to account for the fact that merely 1,000 years ago, Europe was an unsophisticated backwater barely able to hang on against superior Arabic civilizations. Also the genetic similarity between steppe nomads, Han Chinese, and Native Americans in spite of their very disparate outcomes. It also doesn't help that it's pretty much illegal to conduct actual science about this.

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How does one so effortlessly ignore objective reality?

This is a well-documented phenomenon and probably one of humanity's greatest weaknesses. Very sad.

[Pokesan]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It also doesn't help that it's pretty much illegal to conduct actual science about this.

what would be the point of such research? what would be useful about it?

study finds: blacks are very bad?

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think the common argument is that these genetic traits aren't uniformly grouped between different populations of humans, because there tends to be just as much genetic variation within what we consider a race as there is between them.

The "more variation within groups than between groups" argument is a red herring. Let me give an example. Let's look at something like height. For argument sake, let's say white people vary from 4'6" to 7', with an average height of 6'. Further, let's say Asians vary from 4'4" to 6'10", with an average height of 5'6". The range of heights for either population (2'6") is much greater than the difference in average height (6"), but would you then say that means the difference in average is meaningless? If someone were to say that whites were on average taller than Asians, would you claim they are incorrect because there's more variation within each group? Of course not.

Things like IQ and brain size are also muddled by nutrition, poverty, etc.

Absolutely, but there is also a strong genetic component to IQ. The current scientific understanding is that genetics determine a kind of upper limit on IQ, which can be raise slightly (5-10 points at most) by the perfect environment, but can be lowered greatly (30 points or more) by a very bad environment.

Of course, it's not a very sound argument, especially when you have traits like hemophilia, sickle cell anemia, and fused rhomboid muscles that are highly clustered within otherwise "genetically diverse" populations within a single racial construct. Genetics are allowed to affect behavior in dogs, but not in humans apparently... golden retrievers and labrador retrievers have different nuances in their personality, yet are extremely genetically similar.

Good point.

And talking about the implications of this, I'd be willing to bet culture is still 90% responsible for behavior. If you credit genetics for the success and prosperity (or failure) of a race, it's hard to account for the fact that merely 1,000 years ago, Europe was an unsophisticated backwater barely able to hang on against superior Arabic civilizations. Also the genetic similarity between steppe nomads, Han Chinese, and Native Americans in spite of their very disparate outcomes. It also doesn't help that it's pretty much illegal to conduct actual science about this.

Yeah, the lack of science in this area is unfortunate. It's not so much that it's illegal, but funding is nearly non-existent.

On the topic of culture, it's without a doubt true that both genetics and culture play a role in behavior. I'm starting to think that the two are intertwined though, and that cultures develop based on biological imperatives. For instance, if you have a culture that values a certain trait, individuals will begin being selected for that trait. If we lived in a society where food acquisition required long distance running, we would end up selecting for genes that are best for long distance running. Our cultures specialize to deal with the challenges that they face. Going back to your dog example, we've been breeding dogs for certain traits for thousands of years, and really we kind of do the same with selecting our own mates. We look for traits that we believe our children will benefit from having.

And just incidentally, the rise in Europe may actually be attributable to the black plague. There is a theory floating about that since the black plague killed so many people and tended to go after the poor more often (due to bad sanitation), that this had a side effect of raising the average IQ through a rather brutal form of selection pressure.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by Pokesan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

literally phrenology

So because there was once a pseudoscience regarding the human brain, any study of the human brain is now rendered as pseudoscience? Someone better tell all those chemical engineers to stop bothering with alchemy.

Also, the difference in behavior, if it is caused by genetics, does not necessarily require a difference in brain size/structure. For instance, blacks have on average 19-21% more free testosterone than whites, and testosterone is associated with increased aggression. That is a purely hormonal cause that could offer an explanation for the data.

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by Pokesan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

what would be the point of such research? what would be useful about it?

A greater understanding of our world? Are you seriously arguing against the acquisition of knowledge simply because you don't like what might be learned? Talk about backwards thinking.

Even beyond the pursuit of knowledge for knowledge's sake, this information could have obvious practical use. For instance, we base a lot of social policy on the idea that we should see equal outcomes among the races. If we see that one racial group is underrepresented in a field, let's say medicine, we explain this difference as being caused by some kind of unfairness, and thus we tip the scales in favor of the race that is underrepresented. In medicine, this takes the form of blacks getting accepted to medical schools with wildly lower test scores than whites/Asians. The thought here is that if we just introduce a little unfairness for a period of time (years, maybe decades), then the problem will sort itself out and we will eventually be able to remove this unfairness and we'll have equal outcomes with no discrimination of any kind. If the difference is instead something biological, then our response to the disparity may change. Even if we were a completely egalitarian society that believed everyone should have the same standard of living, the means for achieving this would shift. Rather than attempting to force people into jobs that they are not suited for, it would be more optimal to have each person doing the job that they are best at, and then redistributing wealth to even things out. People being pushed into professions that they are not suited for adds a lot of inefficiency to the system.

[Swish]

Originally Posted by Lune [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

... it's hard to account for the fact that merely 1,000 years ago, Europe was an unsophisticated backwater barely able to hang on against superior Arabic civilizations.

Talking loosely, but don't tell that to the Vikings, the Anglo-Saxons or the Celts. People think that just because Rome was crumbling/evolving that Europe was somehow on its knees.

I'd argue Europe has never looked weaker than it does currently. The EU has bound itself in all kinds of red tape and despite a bunch of laws about migration from outside the EU people can just walk on in.

Meantime people of Germany/France/UK/etc who married an American/Canadian/etc are told that they're not allowed to bring them here without a ton of legal paperwork...just jump on a truck, seems to work [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[sOurDieSel]

Points out government statistics that say blacks commit more violent crime and are a smaller percent of the population in America then Whites.

Gets called a racist.

Then gets told race doesn't really 'exist' and that it is just a social construct.

rofl. liberal logic 101

[Nocsucow]

Originally Posted by sOurDieSel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Points out government statistics that say blacks commit more violent crime and are a smaller percent of the population in America then Whites.

Gets called a racist.

Then gets told race doesn't really 'exist' and that it is just a social construct.

rofl. liberal logic 101

lol right!!!!

[Ranndom]

Originally Posted by sOurDieSel [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Then gets told race doesn't really 'exist' and that it is just a social construct.

Pretty much.