1. The official Sherdog Store is back! Check it out! » Discuss it here! »
Violence/Genocide: Do not condone violence or genocide on a person or group of people. You are free to attack a person or groups ideas but you are crossing the line when calling for violence. This will be heavily enforced in threads with breaking news involving victims.

Nicholas Wade and the Reality of Race

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by Cold Front, May 21, 2014.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Cold Front Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,477
    Likes Received:
    0
    Very pithy.

    Here let me help you with it: People make mistakes. Scientists make mistakes. Nonscientists make mistakes. Social Darwinists make mistakes. Those opposed to Social Darwinists make mistakes. Data crunchers make mistakes. Those opposed to data crunching make mistakes.

    Did we cover everyone?
     
  2. kuromusha Silver Belt

    Joined:
    Oct 5, 2011
    Messages:
    13,208
    Likes Received:
    375
    Location:
    Orange County
    A guy named "cold front" talking about racial genetics.

    Hmmm
     
  3. UpaLoompa Grand Quasiprophet of the Sakaran Apocolyps

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    24,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hence my use of "necessarily" in the necessary/sufficient manner.
    For the US, folk race categorization can be useful (though your blog botches that up quite badly) but that's not necessarily the case elsewhere.
     
  4. OldGoat Red Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,783
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't know about that. Especially with complex organisms that have a sense of duty towards family. This can drain resources from younger members of the family impacting their own chances to reproduce.
     
  5. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,084
    Likes Received:
    13,664
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    But I'm not talking about reproductive success, I'm talking about the human perception of superiority. To take your example, we would consider the Narcissus a superior individual than the drunk with five kids and that influences the way we interact with them.

    Biological fitness and success as defined by humans is completely different so even if you say that no one group isn't necessarily superior just because they're more intelligent people will perceive that group as being superior because we value intelligence over the ability to reproduce.

    I'm not saying I subscribe to this but you can't say you don't see the potential for something like this to happen with this kind of research. Again, not saying that is nearly enough to justify censoring this kind of research but the possibility for abuse is there.

    Someone else earlier ITT thread mentioned social Darwinism while pointing out that Darwin himself didn't buy into it. That's a good example of what I'm talking about. Good research being bent to justify some sort of bigotry.
     
  6. IDL Steel Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    25,050
    Likes Received:
    113
    Location:
    Lending money to your government
    With examples like that we'd be crossing over into the nature/nurture discussion.

    The drop in Western Birth rates is due to environmental factors. It is possible to drastically alter the behavior of a society without changing the genetics.

    Before you quoted that some scientists believe that all behaviors are hereditary. I don't think that applies as much in todays society.
     
  7. Cold Front Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,477
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not that it mattered, but Darwin most certainly did subscribe to those notions. He basically agreed with his cousin Francis Galton on those matters, and told Galton so in their correspondence.

    Darwin also vehemently disagreed with Alfred Russel Wallace when his co-inventor of natural selection told him that he thought all men had evolved beyond the point where evolution was a factor in their development.

    Darwin opposed polygenism and hated all slavery and institutionalized racism with a passion, but he was too intelligent and subtle a thinker not to understand the full implications of his theory and how it applied to man.
     
    Last edited: May 21, 2014
  8. UpaLoompa Grand Quasiprophet of the Sakaran Apocolyps

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    24,414
    Likes Received:
    0
     
  9. OldGoat Red Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,783
    Likes Received:
    0
    Which is why otherwise, seemingly intelligent people engage in deliberate double think. When notions of sub human humans is used politically millions get enslaved or eradicated. What is more harmful to society? Perpetuating a lie in order to maintain peace and tolerance or potentially unleashing a modern form of Nazis again? Though we still have slavery in Congo and Saudi Arabia and other parts of the world partly because of unenlightened people.
     
  10. Zankou Bringing peace and love Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    May 24, 2004
    Messages:
    31,791
    Likes Received:
    2,203
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    Yep, not saying Dochter is prone to this but there's a belief that just changing the language or folk groupings will make a difference, but no matter how you carve it up and rename it, the mathematical clustering would remain quite distinct. Put another way, even if you used more precise terminology tied to the clustering (as in the chart below, published in "Science"), that semantic shift would have little or no significance for any issues that are disputed. And the other point is that virtually nobody holds an "essentialist" view of race in which they don't understand the concept of race mixing, and think that all human populations are 'racially distinct' at some binary logical level. Actually I'm pretty sure literally nobody has ever held that view, though I might be wrong. Everybody knows that Latin American populations are quite 'mixed,' for example, but one would have to be rather confused to think that had any bearing on folk notions of race, much less their relation to actual human genetic variation.

    [​IMG]
     
  11. Cold Front Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,477
    Likes Received:
    0
    The nature/nuture dichotomy ultimately doesn't matter. From an evolutionary perspective, nature is always changing and so how our genetics interacts with that change will also adapt.

    Up until two hundred years ago, the most intelligent people in Western societies tended to breed and survive more frequently than the less intelligent. Now the opposite is true. Has the environment changed? Of course. We're wealthier, less religious, have more access to modern technology, etc.

    All those things affect differential breeding rates. That's why I earlier said that context matters before you decide which traits are more fit.
     
  12. Khabib Khanate Hashashiyan Staff Member Senior Moderator

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2011
    Messages:
    45,084
    Likes Received:
    13,664
    Location:
    Pleasure Dome
    To keep with your example of schizophrenia, anti-psychotic medication leads to improvements in most patients so while these individuals have schizophrenia modern medicine allows them to improve their quality of life significantly and as such their affliction likely won't affect their reproductive fitness the way it would in the absence of such medication.

    Its definitely a difficult question to answer. Without putting too much thought into it I would say its better to side with science on this rather than politics. Let scientists do as they do best and just let the chips fall where they may.
     
  13. UpaLoompa Grand Quasiprophet of the Sakaran Apocolyps

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2003
    Messages:
    24,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Note I didn't say he thought there were no adaptive differences among populations. It has been a long, long time since I read Descent but I seem to recall that he attributed most behavioral/supposed cognitive differences to culture/environment.
     
  14. OldGoat Red Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,783
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well how do you argue against selective breeding then? Without some form of sanctity of human life moral postulate an argument can be made that society would benefit.
     
  15. OldGoat Red Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,783
    Likes Received:
    0
    Do you believe in free will? And if so what is the source of free will?
     
  16. IDL Steel Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    25,050
    Likes Received:
    113
    Location:
    Lending money to your government
    From a cold scientific view, certainly. Also from an authoritarian view. That was the basis of A Brave New World.
     
  17. Cold Front Banned Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2004
    Messages:
    8,477
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, is it more important that your gene's survive or those of your younger siblings?

    As you probably know, we have simple formulas to work this out. If the tradeoff cost to your sibling's genes is more than the additional benefit to your own gene, then altruism and self-sacrifice makes sense in that case and your selfishness will have an indirect but important impact on your family's genetic fitness, even if you aren't directly impacted.

    If not, then not.
     
  18. IDL Steel Belt

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2009
    Messages:
    25,050
    Likes Received:
    113
    Location:
    Lending money to your government
    I see your point. Wether it be guided by natural or artificial (man made) factors in the end.
     
  19. OldGoat Red Belt

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 2007
    Messages:
    8,783
    Likes Received:
    0
    Since evolution has no direction it's impossible to say. Especially since the genes could do everything "right" and still get wiped out due to pure chance. Though on average it depends on what portion of your genes are in your relatives and how your genes dictate your body to behave to protect them. See ants lol. But how do you explain the altruism towards the mutated older non-reproductive folks that may need extra care? Which can take resources from you and impact your own survival.
     
  20. Pem123 Red Belt

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2013
    Messages:
    9,711
    Likes Received:
    166
    Location:
    GYM
    :icon_chee:icon_chee:icon_chee
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.