Does race exist?

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm bored and I just want to get to the meat of this. For the purpose of this discussion, race will be defined as biological variation between human groups or within the human species that can be quantified genetically, medically and/or anthropologically. Similar concepts are - for example - ethnicity, population, cline, haplogroup, etc.

This has nothing to do with notions of superiority or inferiority as those are subjective, i.e. one group may be considered generally superior to one person or in one area of inquiry and that same group may be considered generally inferior to another person or in another area of inquiry.So that's a waste of time so let's not get into it.

Also, use scientific data from the physical sciences where appropriate, such as physical/biological anthropology, biology, zoology, population genetics, medicine, etc. I don't want to see people using, for example, psychologists to buttress their argument! So people like Rushton, MacDonald and Murray are inappropriate to this debate.

And..begin.

 

[Revoltingest]

It exists.
Can it be ambiguous?
Yes.

 

[dust1n]

I'm bored and I just want to get to the meat of this. For the purpose of this discussion, race will be defined as biological variation between human groups or within the human species that can be quantified genetically, medically and/or anthropologically. Similar concepts are - for example - ethnicity, population, cline, haplogroup, etc.

If that is the definition, then just about any arbitrarily selected group of people could be considered a race, and just about every person in existence would be a race within itself.

 

[Brickjectivity]

I'd say racism is a vestigial organ left over from evolution. We really are all one species, but evolution happened as a result of small changes. Its natural to make a big deal out of small differences. Leaving racism behind is taking control of our evolution. The opposite, observing race, that means subdividing and encouraging survival-level competition and the deaths of those who cannot compete. As the population continues to grow the tendency to be racist increases and the pressure to fight or die increases. In the ancient past racism wasn't a choice but a fact. Someone with a slightly different nose was another race. Now things are different, because now we want to preserve our intelligence and take control of our development.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'd say racism is a vestigial organ left over from evolution. We really are all one species, but evolution happened as a result of small changes. Its natural to make a big deal out of small differences. Leaving racism behind is taking control of our evolution. The opposite, observing race, that means subdividing and encouraging survival-level competition and the deaths of those who cannot compete. As the population continues to grow the tendency to be racist increases and the pressure to fight or die increases. In the ancient past racism wasn't a choice but a fact. Someone with a slightly different nose was another race. Now things are different, because now we want to preserve our intelligence and take control of our development.

Racism is really quite irrelevant to this discussion. For example, I accept that human populations are biologically distinct yet I also accept that humans are all one species and that notions of superiority or inferiority are irrelevant. Monolithic categories such as "white", "black", "red", "yellow", "brown" are biologically meaningless, to be sure. The distinctions tend to be smaller than that.

In one way, the question is really if we stopped evolving when we left Africa or did evolution continue after we left?

 

[Brickjectivity]

In one way, the question is really if we stopped evolving when we left Africa or did evolution continue after we left?

Oh, we stopped.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Oh, we stopped.

Evidence?

 

[dust1n]

Racism is really quite irrelevant to this discussion. For example, I accept that human populations are biologically distinct yet I also accept that humans are all one species and that notions of superiority or inferiority are irrelevant. Monolithic categories such as "white", "black", "red", "yellow", "brown" are biologically meaningless, to be sure. The distinctions tend to be smaller than that.

In one way, the question is really if we stopped evolving when we left Africa or did evolution continue after we left?

If you separated two populations of humans from each other entirely, and bred them exclusively for some tens of thousands of years, than I'd say you'd start to see phenotypes alter, and eventually, some huge changes could diverge the two, if the environment provided the right conditions.

The thing about race is that it once generally was given that the phenotype of one's skin would be indication of a number of inherited traits besides... well, you know, the color of your skin. This isn't really so. We're all different in our genetic make up to some extent and in various ways, and most genetic variation occurs within a ethnicity as opposed than between the two. Everyone's slightly genetically different. Hell, we know know that around, if not more than, half of biological mass that goes up make a functioning human doesn't have your DNA. We all house a few million different species of living things in us.

 

[George-ananda]

Using the definition given in the OP, I don't see how 'race' could not exist. If it did not exist how could we send a sample to a lab and have them tell us about our geographical ancestral area? There must then be genetic differences.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm a wait'n for someone to argue that gender doesn't exist next.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Evidence?

Rather than evidence I think its a matter of time scale. We exist in a very short period of time. If evolution is in progress its not happening on a time scale that we can perceive. Its as-if time has stopped or evolution has stopped.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Rather than evidence I think its a matter of time scale. We exist in a very short period of time. If evolution is in progress its not happening on a time scale that we can perceive. Its as-if time has stopped or evolution has stopped.

Hmm. I'd like to recommend a book for you: A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History: Nicholas Wade: 9781594204463: Amazon.com: Books

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I'm a wait'n for someone to argue that gender doesn't exist next.

Some people do.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

If you separated two populations of humans from each other entirely, and bred them exclusively for some tens of thousands of years, than I'd say you'd start to see phenotypes alter, and eventually, some huge changes could diverge the two, if the environment provided the right conditions.

But there's many groups of humans that have been geographically separated from other groups for thousands of years. There's still tribal groups who haven't made contact with the outside world yet.

The thing about race is that it once generally was given that the phenotype of one's skin would be indication of a number of inherited traits besides... well, you know, the color of your skin. This isn't really so. We're all different in our genetic make up to some extent and in various ways, and most genetic variation occurs within a ethnicity as opposed than between the two. Everyone's slightly genetically different. Hell, we know know that around, if not more than, half of biological mass that goes up make a functioning human doesn't have your DNA. We all house a few million different species of living things in us.

How are you defining an ethnicity? If you define a group too largely, then it would hold true such as taking Europeans as a broad category. But: Fighting the mantra, “People vary more within the groups than vary between groups” | Anthropology.net

 

[Brickjectivity]

Hmm. I'd like to recommend a book for you: A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History: Nicholas Wade: 9781594204463: Amazon.com: Books

I can't go buying books, but if it appears in the local library I'll take a look. I don't agree with his premise that agrarian societies have become biologically less violent. We're still plenty violent. Also I don't agree that ashkenazi Jews are biologically more intelligent. It think their Talmud study causes their minds to expand somewhat.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I can't go buying books, but if it appears in the local library I'll take a look. I don't agree with his premise that agrarian societies have become biologically less violent. We're still plenty violent. Also I don't agree that ashkenazi Jews are biologically more intelligent. It think their Talmud study causes their minds to expand somewhat.

I'll PM you.

 

[fantome profane]

I'm a wait'n for someone to argue that gender doesn't exist next.

Of course gender exists. At current count there are at least 51 genders. Probably a lot more.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Of course gender exists. At current count there are at least 51 genders. Probably a lot more.

Lol. And most of those categories are redundant.

 

[Flankerl]

Does race exist?

Nope.

 

[dust1n]

But there's many groups of humans that have been geographically separated from other groups for thousands of years. There's still tribal groups who haven't made contact with the outside world yet.

There aren't that many left. I mean, relative to size of the rest of the population, it's such a miniscule portion. Takes a bit for significant changes to happen.

How are you defining an ethnicity? If you define a group too largely, then it would hold true such as taking Europeans as a broad category. But: Fighting the mantra, “People vary more within the groups than vary between groups” | Anthropology.net

This is the problem with ethnicity and race. It's an arbitrary distinction. Are we talking black people or are we talking Congonese. It's my presumption that you could find a great amount of genetic difference between two isolated groups. You could find a great amount of genetic difference between any two given people, even genetic twins.

Anyway, my source:

"The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our finding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population. Thus, caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes."

Genetic Similarities Within and Between Human Populations