Does RACE exist?

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by molly bloom
Then you'll have no difficulty giving us a definition of race.

One could simply define a race as being a group of people who are genertically very similar. I can see no problem with that. The definition of the cut-off point would be arbitrary and the boundaries would be a little strange (ie. 2 people could be almost identical but be of different races if they are sitting right on the boundary), but it is a workable and consistant definition.

[Kuciwalker]

A genetic definition of race fails, because there is a greater difference between individuals within each race than between the "average" individual of each race.

[Bereta_Eder]

That's right Mr. Junkie.

[Rogan Josh]

Originally posted by skywalker
A genetic definition of race fails, because there is a greater difference between individuals within each race than between the "average" individual of each race.

Sorry, but that is such a dense statement. Since the definition of someone being of the same race would (according to the definition I propose) be that they are genetically similar, the genetic difference between individuals within each race could not be more than twice the difference between one of the individuals and the "average" individual. duh!

[Bereta_Eder]

Despite the fact your argument makes no sense there's also a scientific conclusion to what skywalker said.

[Rogan Josh]

*sigh* - try reading it again patikiss. This time switch on your brain.

[Bereta_Eder]

Your starting assumption is wrong my freunde. The definition of race used in said study was the one widely accepted, not the one you proposed.

[Rogan Josh]

Which starting assumption? I haven't made one.

[Gangerolf]

Does race exist? Yes
Does it matter? Obviously
Should it matter? Probably not

[Bereta_Eder]

Originally posted by Rogan Josh
Which starting assumption? I haven't made one.

Since the definition of someone being of the same race would (according to the definition I propose) be that they are genetically similar

[Cruddy]

Racial stereotypes certainly exist...

The belief of superiority based on racial origin exists...

Personally I wish they didn't... but they do.

[Rogan Josh]

That isn't an assumption - its a definition.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Race among humans is a social construct. It only exists because we say it exists. People on the bottom tend to be "Black," regardless of their ancestral-origin, skin color, etc. People on the top tend to be "white," not that many of these "whites" would be recognizable as white to most Westerners.

The human race is a continuem. There are no clearly recognized boundries between one group and anthore. We blend into each other. Furthermore, we can all interbreed.

Not only that, but there is no difference between chihuahuas and St. Bernards. Furthermore, they can interbreed.

"People on the bottom" and "people on the top" are only social constructs.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by MrFun


One can advance legitimate arguments that race is a social construct based on these physical differences.


To deny the physical differences among different groups of people would be ignorant, but to argue that race is a social construct based on these differences is legitimate, IMO.

FOR CRYING OUT LOUD.

LANGUAGE IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT THROUGH WHICH WE CREATE MEANING OUT OF CHAOS.

therefore

EVERYTHING IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT

therefore

ATTEMPTING TO DEVALUE RACE BY CALLING IT A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT IS JUST PLAIN SILLY

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by skywalker
A genetic definition of race fails, because there is a greater difference between individuals within each race than between the "average" individual of each race.

The studies Jared Diamond uses in The Third Chimpanzee refute this. What is your source?

The difference in skin colour between individual Swedes is greater than that between Swedes and Austalian Aboriginies?