Is claiming Germans are "genetically intelligent" racists?

[Rod1]

Focus on the original argument and your original assertion.

My original argument was "No, they didnt" when you said Germans were writing poetry in the 500s.

What was your original point? That no such written language existed.

I didnt had an original point i was merely pointing out that you stated a falsehood.

 

[gspieler]

Generally speaking, Germans are obviously intelligent people. There are obvious environmental and genetic components to that intelligence. It's silly to believe they would have achieved all of the things they have, simply on the basis of being from Western Europe.

 

[snakedafunky]

Generally speaking, Germans are obviously intelligent people. There are obvious environmental and genetic components to that intelligence. It's silly to believe they would have achieved all of the things they have, simply on the basis of being from Western Europe.

The thing is there is no precise definition of what a German is because Germany is in central Europe and has always mixed with all its neighbors (many of them were part of what was considered German or Prussia at the time.
For example, where I am from when I drive 100 kilometers I could reach 4 different countries France, Luxembourg Belgium and Netherland.
From an ethical and cultural point, I am closer to those people than another German from Bavaria.
It's a bit of an impossible argument to pin down because German means more central Europe. Lots of people from Poland, Bulgaria, etc. were Germans at some point in history.

 

[Rational Poster]

My original argument was "No, they didnt" when you said Germans were writing poetry in the 500s.



I didnt had an original point i was merely pointing out that you stated a falsehood.

Ancient Germans read their poems before battle.

 

[Liquid Smoke]

It's a stupid claim to make because we don't know enough about genetics or the brain to test it.

 

[gspieler]

The thing is there is no precise definition of what a German is because Germany is in central Europe and has always mixed with all its neighbors (many of them were part of what was considered German or Prussia at the time.
For example, where I am from when I drive 100 kilometers I could reach 4 different countries France, Luxembourg Belgium and Netherland.
From an ethical and cultural point, I am closer to those people than another German from Bavaria.
It's a bit of an impossible argument to pin down because German means more central Europe. Lots of people from Poland, Bulgaria, etc. were Germans at some point in history.

Of course Germans are a mixed people, and there is a significant degree of genetic variation within them. I was speaking in trends. Eg, on average, an ethnic German is going to have more genetic commonality with another ethnic German, then they are with a Brazilian, Indian, Russian, Nigerian, etc.

 

[snakedafunky]

Of course Germans are a mixed people, and there is a significant degree of genetic variation within them. I was speaking in trends. Eg, on average, an ethnic German is going to have more genetic commonality with another ethnic German, then they are with a Brazilian, Indian, Russian, Nigerian, etc.

Yeah, I do agree with the point you are making. Its pretty clear that some ethnicities and cultures are better suited for today's world.
Nothing good will come from denying that.
The question should be how we can make sure we have reasonable systems in place so we can enable everyone to have a good life.
So that those shortcomings don't hold them back in the future. That is something that benefits everyone.

 

[lfd0311]

My original argument was "No, they didnt" when you said Germans were writing poetry in the 500s.



I didnt had an original point i was merely pointing out that you stated a falsehood.

So now your position is if there aren't any surviving works of poetry from the 500s that that equals proof that no written language existed in the 500s? But I'm the one creating strawmen? Come on dude.

 

[TheGreatA]

Yeah, I do agree with the point you are making. Its pretty clear that some ethnicities and cultures are better suited for today's world.
Nothing good will come from denying that.
The question should be how we can make sure we have reasonable systems in place so we can enable everyone to have a good life.
So that those shortcomings don't hold them back in the future. That is something that benefits everyone.

I think we do ourselves a disfavour by thinking that "our" system is better off for everybody else. Instead, we should be thinking that our system is the best for us. It's not necessarily the best for a man from the Middle East or China, or Africa.

Others have their own ways of governing. Perhaps they will still be here 100,000 years after while we are all gone, who knows. Maybe North Korea will still be around while America has sunk to the ocean. There is no way to know. Sometimes these people are only troubled by the systems that are imposed upon them, against their will, and end up worse off.

Their shortcomings are shortcomings based on our current standard of self-judgment (IQ, social skills, economic success, etc.). But if it were up to a contest of catching wild prey in a natural environment, then certainly most "3rd worlders" would whip the 1st worlders. If it was about surviving on water and bread for weeks while maintaining a stable, lucid mentality, then the 3rd worlder would certainly get the best of the 1st worlder.

If they were able to impose their standards on us, then we would certainly come up every bit as short, as they might in ours. Perhaps more so.

 

[Rod1]

So now your position is if there aren't any surviving works of poetry from the 500s that that equals proof that no written language existed in the 500s? But I'm the one creating strawmen? Come on dude.

My position was that your statement was a falsehood.

The person you were responding didnt said that the germanic tribes didnt had a written language, just that it was

a) borrowed from Italians.

b) Unable to convey complex ideas.

You counter-argued that Germans were writing poetry in the 500s, yet you were unable to prove your claim.

Now you want me to prove a negative, which is of course an impossibility.

 

[AGGAMEMNON66]

Any kind of stereotype can be racist/bigoted/nationalist/whatever-ist. Even good stereotypes.

Btw, apparently on average, Germany is tied at 8 for a national IQ of 99. Countries like UK, Italy, China and Japan are higher.

https://iq-research.info/en/page/average-iq-by-country

Well yeah, now that the refugees are there. Duh

 

[lfd0311]

My position was that your statement was a falsehood.

The person you were responding didnt said that the germanic tribes didnt had a written language, just that it was

a) borrowed from Italians.

b) Unable to convey complex ideas.

You counter-argued that Germans were writing poetry in the 500s, yet you were unable to prove your claim.

Now you want me to prove a negative, which is of course an impossibility.

His postion was that it was based off of the runic alphabet. Which was every single alphabet at that time. This is exactly what I'm talking about. If these people weren't capable of conveying complex ideas, than neither were the Greeks, who used the exact same alphabet and sort of invented modern Western Philosophy.

Secondly, I realized that I had gotten my readings on the Alemannic texts and the Theodoric poems mixed togther in my head, and was just about to conceed that when you made your totally absurd "pathological need to be right" post, so I thought I'd keep this going a little while to show the absolute absurd irony of that statement. Your abusrd need to dumb conversations down to an absurd level so that on some tiny level you can be right about something in an attempt to claim victorym while in this thread then claiming that's what others are actually doing, is just ridiculous. Let's just start with this:

The person you were responding didnt said that the germanic tribes didnt had a written language

This is the very first post I responded to in this thread, the one you in turn responded to

no..they didnt have a written language. the runes is all the evidence there is.

the germans were not as advanced compared to southern europeans or middle eastern peoples.

So yes, he absolutely said they didn't have a written language. Said Germans "simply used runes" which is exactly what all forms of written language where up to that point in human history. Latin and the other Italic alphabets all started out as runic languages and evolved over time into modern languages. To sit here and say that that makes them not real written languages means that all written language, including the one we're having this conversation in, aren't real. You're willing to go there to be a tiny bit right. But again, I'm actually the one who needs to be right. Good God.

 

[FrankensteinMMA]

So yes, he absolutely said they didn't have a written language. Said Germans "simply used runes" which is exactly what all forms of written language where up to that point in human history. Latin and the other Italic alphabets all started out as runic languages and evolved over time into modern languages. To sit here and say that that makes them not real written languages means that all written language, including the one we're having this conversation in, aren't real. You're willing to go there to be a tiny bit right. But again, I'm actually the one who needs to be right. Good God.

but the runes didnt evolve. even with the extension of anglo saxon runes..they never turned into a complete phonetic alphabet and no grand literature has ever been found written in it.

every culture in the world has glyphs that mean an object or an idea.
sure technically ALL and EVERY culture ever had a written language.

this notion is laughable in academia.

the cut off between signs and symbols and advanced written communication is clear amongst historians.

you cant say someone invented the space shuttle because they threw their arms in the air trying to reach the moon, because thats how it all started.

its wether or not those who literally tried to reach for the moon actually did so through evolution.

 

[Rod1]

His postion was that it was based off of the runic alphabet. Which was every single alphabet at that time. This is exactly what I'm talking about. If these people weren't capable of conveying complex ideas, than neither were the Greeks, who used the exact same alphabet and sort of invented modern Western Philosophy.

This makes no sense, knowing the letters and being able to read and write are not the same thing.

Even a chimpanzee can memorize the alphabet.

Secondly, I realized that I had gotten my readings on the Alemannic texts and the Theodoric poems mixed togther in my head, and was just about to conceed that when you made your totally absurd "pathological need to be right" post, so I thought I'd keep this going a little while to show the absolute absurd irony of that statement. Your abusrd need to dumb conversations down to an absurd level so that on some tiny level you can be right about something in an attempt to claim victorym while in this thread then claiming that's what others are actually doing, is just ridiculous. Let's just start with this:

Because you do have a pathological need to be right.

I merely said "No, they didnt", at that point you could had googled for any sort of ancient germanic work and prove me wrong.

So yes, he absolutely said they didn't have a written language. Said Germans "simply used runes" which is exactly what all forms of written language where up to that point in human history. Latin and the other Italic alphabets all started out as runic languages and evolved over time into modern languages. To sit here and say that that makes them not real written languages means that all written language, including the one we're having this conversation in, aren't real. You're willing to go there to be a tiny bit right. But again, I'm actually the one who needs to be right. Good God.

There is a big difference, just like there is a big difference in the level of mathematics different cultures achieved.

Just because you can count to 10 it doesnt means you can do math.

 

[lfd0311]

This makes no sense, knowing the letters and being able to read and write are not the same thing.

Even a chimpanzee can memorize the alphabet

This is such a sad, lame response I actually feel bad for you. But you don't NEED to be right about at least one thing, right?

Because you do have a pathological need to be right.

I merely said "No, they didnt", at that point you could had googled for any sort of ancient germanic work and prove me wrong.

Do you read?

There is a big difference, just like there is a big difference in the level of mathematics different cultures achieved.

Just because you can count to 10 it doesnt means you can do math.

LOL, here you go again. You couldn't make a consistent point if your life depended on it. First they had no written language, and no ability to convey language whatsoever. Now when you're once again exposed as being full of shit it magically morphs into having simply been "Germanic written language wasn't as advanced". Why do you suppose that is? Because you NEED to be right in some capacity. Even if you have to shift goalposts and lie to get there. Even on one little thing, and even if I didn't argue that point to begin with. Hey, what do you call that again? Arguing against a point that I never made in the first place? You used it earlier in the thread....

 

[lfd0311]

but the runes didnt evolve. even with the extension of anglo saxon runes..they never turned into a complete phonetic alphabet and no grand literature has ever been found written in it.

Yes they did. The runic alphabet is literally the basis for the modern alphabet. All alphabets started from that. Hell, the written language that we're communicating in right now is a product of the Futhark and Latin alphabets. By the way it's literally called the "futhark" alphabet because the letters F,U, a letter that would evolve into the modern "TH" sound, A, R and K all come from that alphabet.

every culture in the world has glyphs that mean an object or an idea.
sure technically ALL and EVERY culture ever had a written language.

this notion is laughable in academia.


the cut off between signs and symbols and advanced written communication is clear amongst historians.

Dude, I don't think you understand how wrong you are on this point. You don't seem to understand how different glyphs and the runic alphabet are. Glyphs are just picutres representing things. The Runic Alphabet is a system of letters that when paired together form words. If your position is that that Runic Alphabet is not a sign of an advanced written language, and that it "laughable academia" and "clear amongst historians", then it's your position that it is a clear consensus that the Greeks produced not a speck of written language in thier history, and people like Socrates, Plato, Hippocrates and Aristotle are seen as nothing more than backwater tribesman carving meaningless symbols on pieces of stone that may or may not have meant something by modern historians. Do you not see how absurd that is?

you cant say someone invented the space shuttle because they threw their arms in the air trying to reach the moon, because thats how it all started.

its wether or not those who literally tried to reach for the moon actually did so through evolution.

 

[Rod1]

This is such a sad, lame response I actually feel bad for you. But you don't NEED to be right about at least one thing, right?

Its not sad, nor lame.

You are simply trying to prove your falsehood through deduction "They had an alphabet, ergo they had a writing system, ergo they wrote poetry".

Im merely poking holes in your flawed deduction process, because Germans didnt invented the alphabet, they copied it and used for things like charms, divination and spells.

It seems you are losing focus again thanks to your pathology so ill refer to what @FrankensteinMMA said and you responded to.

the germans carved runes on stone and wood. none before the 12th century were complete works of literature of any kind but instead only simple concepts that are largely vague.

This is what you responded to by saying "They were writitng poetry in the 500s", you are mistaking writing with composing.

LOL, here you go again. You couldn't make a consistent point if your life depended on it. First they had no written language, and no ability to convey language whatsoever. Now when you're once again exposed as being full of shit it magically morphs into having simply been "Germanic written language wasn't as advanced". Why do you suppose that is? Because you NEED to be right in some capacity. Even if you have to shift goalposts and lie to get there. Even on one little thing, and even if I didn't argue that point to begin with. Hey, what do you call that again? Arguing against a point that I never made in the first place? You used it earlier in the thread....

The point was given in the original post that you quoted.

the germans carved runes on stone and wood. none before the 12th century were complete works of literature of any kind but instead only simple concepts that are largely vague.

You countered that point with "They were writing poetry in the 500s" to which i said "No, they didnt" .

Im not actually trying to argue a point, since unless you provide evidence to your falsehood, doesnt stands, im merely trying to educate you on the basics of language and mathematics and why those modern things that we teach kids in elementary and are key to our modern society actually took millenia to develop.

 

[lfd0311]

Its not sad, nor lame.

You are simply trying to prove your falsehood through deduction "They had an alphabet, ergo they had a writing system, ergo they wrote poetry".

Proof that you don't actually read my posts

Im merely poking holes in your flawed deduction process, because Germans didnt invented the alphabet, they copied it and used for things like charms, divination and spells.

It seems you are losing focus again thanks to your pathology so ill refer to what @FrankensteinMMA said and you responded to.

It seems that 1.) you don't actually read my posts and 2.) are determined to prove that you're willing to ignore being proven blatantly wrong in your attempt to be right. You claim he said that he never claimed they had no written language. I provided the post where he said that, verbatium. You're still acting like you somehow won that exchange.

This is what you responded to by saying "They were writitng poetry in the 500s", you are mistaking writing with composing.

Look at you doding all over the place. You just said that he never claimed they didn't have a written language. Do I need to quote him saying exactly that again? You're so full of shit you've actually convinced yourself you're being honest.

The point was given in the original post that you quoted.

That you have to find one thing to cling to to be a little bit right to and cling to it?

You countered that point with "They were writing poetry in the 500s" to which i said "No, they didnt" .

see above

Im not actually trying to argue a point, since unless you provide evidence to your falsehood, doesnt stands, im merely trying to educate you on the basics of language and mathematics and why those modern things that we teach kids in elementary and are key to our modern society actually took millenia to develop.

Now your argument has devolved to "Well, I'm not actually arguing against anything. It's amazing how you can be so full of shit across so wide an array of topics in so short a time span.

im merely trying to educate you on the basics of language and mathematics and why those modern things that we teach kids in elementary and are key to our modern society actually took millenia to develop

ROFL. And you're doing that by claiming that the written language they devolped out of wasn't a written language at all? And that makes total, perfect sense to you?