|
Post by Anima Eternae on Feb 3, 2005 22:30:51 GMT -5
Just keep repeating yourself AE, no need for explanation, arguments, logic, hell it worked for the president of the USA. I can even help you, repeat after me, biological marxist, biological marxist, biological marxist. Honestly do ever have anything interesting to say? It's obvious my point is grounded in the chaotic dynamicism of nature. Save your shit for a PBS special.
|
|
|
Post by alexandrian on Feb 3, 2005 23:20:16 GMT -5
What I meant was, I believe in the existence of race, and that - despite PC rheotoric - not everyone is equal. We're close to being equal, but not quite. People are different, and those differences should be acknowledged and embraced instead of ignored. That said, everyone deserves to be treated with common decency and basic respect. I like to think, as I said earlier, that my opinion is fair and balanced, maybe slightly racist to some. The Nazis were human shit, in my humble opinion. Once again Solomon, I agree almost to the letter.
|
|
|
Post by vela on Feb 3, 2005 23:40:28 GMT -5
What I meant was, I believe in the existence of race, and that - despite PC rheotoric - not everyone is equal. We're close to being equal, but not quite. People are different, and those differences should be acknowledged and embraced instead of ignored. That said, everyone deserves to be treated with common decency and basic respect. I like to think, as I said earlier, that my opinion is fair and balanced, maybe slightly racist to some. That's a fine line you're threading, Solomon. It's a good starting definition. It could be better if you protect a couple of weak flanks.
|
|
|
Post by Faelcind on Feb 4, 2005 0:25:24 GMT -5
Solomon, I do not beleive all people are equal in the sense of being the same.
I beleive that the golden rule applies to all human beings and that we all have equal human rights.
I completely agree with you that people are not equal in charecteristics. Its quite clear that some humans are inately gifted with more intelligence then others, and some with greater physical strength and still others with both. I don't think that equall human rights is contingent on all humans being competely equall and I think that is were the left has failed in coupling the two ideas.
I do not object to the idea of their being racial differences in mental charecteristics because it would conflict with my politics, I would find that intellectually dishonest. In truth i find the idea of their being differences in charecter, temperment and mental faculties fascinating I just have not seen the data to powerfully back it up.
By way of comparison I also beleive that women and men are equal in human rights but I have no doubt that they are quite distinct biological. The scientific data is unequivocal as far as I can tell. Their are signficant differences, mentally as well as the obvious physical differences. I wish that the same amount robust scientific work would be carried out to look into to between group differences in humans.
|
|
|
Post by buddyrydell on Feb 4, 2005 0:58:31 GMT -5
Solomon, I do not beleive all people are equal in the sense of being the same. I beleive that the golden rule applies to all human beings and that we all have equal human rights. I completely agree with you that people are not equal in charecteristics. Its quite clear that some humans are inately gifted with more intelligence then others, and some with greater physical strength and still others with both. I don't think that equall human rights is contingent on all humans being competely equall and I think that is were the left has failed in coupling the two ideas. I do not object to the idea of their being racial differences in mental charecteristics because it would conflict with my politics, I would find that intellectually dishonest. In truth i find the idea of their being differences in charecter, temperment and mental faculties fascinating I just have not seen the data to powerfully back it up. By way of comparison I also beleive that women and men are equal in human rights but I have no doubt that they are quite distinct biological. The scientific data is unequivocal as far as I can tell. Their are signficant differences, mentally as well as the obvious physical differences. I wish that the same amount robust scientific work would be carried out to look into to between group differences in humans. Good post Faelcind. See, I also think that we all have natural human/civil rights which must be recognized, in accordance with the Golden Rule, as you mentioned. I also believe that certain traits and qualities are more characteristic of certain races in areas regarding physical strength and in various areas of academia. Everyone has something to bring to the table, only I believe that what that something is varies to a certain extent with the group. I know that sounds like I'm stereotyping certain groups, but I don't think one can totally ignore the number of East Asians who excel in math/engineering, the many Africans who have made remarkable achievements in the development of music styles, or the number of Europeans who have excelled in philosophy and the arts. Of course there are many exceptions within each race, but I think to a certain extent, some groups may have simply adapted to their environments in ways that have enabled them to innovate in unique ways. Hopefully that made sense heh.
|
|
|
Post by Faelcind on Feb 4, 2005 1:46:04 GMT -5
It makes allot of sense Buddy and I am very curious about it myself. I have the same basic impressions you do. However I have number of reasons for questioning these common sense of assumptions.
One is that as biology student I have seen how studies have consistently devauled sub species as taxonomic unit across higher mammals. Sub-species in higher mammals do not show significant behavioral differences. They vary mostly in size, colouring, and minor differences in cranial morphology. Exactly the type of stuff that is obvious in humans. There is also the very close genetic relationship between humans, we are not a very widely divergent species genetically. Finally there is the fact that humans in genereal had a similar cultural enviorment up untill 12,000 years ago which is an eyeblink in evolutionary time. While I think the neolithic has had more effects on us then many anthropologist like to give it credit for I just don't see there being enough time to create really different charecteristics between racial groups based on their cultural enviorments.
|
|
|
Post by Solomon on Feb 4, 2005 1:50:20 GMT -5
seems to be reasonable enough... Hey, human2. I went a little overboard in that one thread, sorry. I'm glad to see you're not holding grudge. Thanks. Feel free to elaborate if you'd like.
|
|
|
Post by nockwasright on Feb 4, 2005 1:51:00 GMT -5
Falecind: if there are not the data to prove beyond any doubt that races differs in mental and behavioural characteristics, why this should mean you should reject the hypotesis? Surely there are also no proofs of the contrary. The simple fact that races differs physically authorises to believe they differ behaviourally and mentally, as thought and behaviour are also the product of brain, hormones, finally of the body.
Not that this could justify any discrimination against an individual.
As for racial pride, I think it could apply what Schopenhauer said on national pride:
"The cheapest' form of pride, is national pride; for if a man is proud of his own nation it follows that he has no qualities of his own of which he can be proud; otherwise, he would not have recourse to those which he shares with his fellow-men. . . . Every miserable fool who has nothing at all of which he can be proud adopts as a last resource pride in the nation to which he belongs; he is ready and glad to defend all its faults and follies, tooth and nail, thus reimbursing himself for his inferiority. . . .National character is only another name for the particular form which the littleness, perversity, and baseness of mankind take in every country.". . .
|
|
|
Post by Faelcind on Feb 4, 2005 2:19:16 GMT -5
Well think off this as a basic sceintific method problem. The null hypothesis would be that the races do not differ in mental behavioral charecteristics. All I am saying is that I don't think the studies that have so far been done are sufficient to reject the null, and for the reasons I stated above I am skeptical as to whether the alternative hypotheis is likely to be supported. I do wish that studies of these issues would be funded and would attract a better class of researchers, because I think they are important.
|
|
|
Post by MC anunnaki on Feb 4, 2005 3:52:58 GMT -5
I can't but feel drawn into your "Turanian" supremacy bullshit. There is a forum for that ya know. Somehow I don't think Turanians are the Eurasians Anima wishes to associate himself with. He limits the definition of Eurasian to those who are of east Asian and white European descent. They must have a high IQ and be good-looking or else they're not true Eurasians.
|
|