Are some races inherently superior to others?

[Libertarian California]

Race, no. Culture/Cultural practices? Definitely.

In some cases, belonging to an ethnic group does determine cultural practices.

[Disserbia]

Race, no. Culture/Cultural practices? Definitely.

In some cases, belonging to an ethnic group does determine cultural practices.

Fro example, I am ethnically pale so I eat a lot of sushi and complain about not having anything to chase my vodka with.

[Grave_n_idle]

Well there are inherent differences between various ethnic groups.

There are 'inherent differences' between two parents and their Trisomy kid, too - that doesn't mean they are different races.

[Libertarian California]

In some cases, belonging to an ethnic group does determine cultural practices.

Fro example, I am ethnically pale so I eat a lot of sushi and complain about not having anything to chase my vodka with.

Ethnicity =/= skin color.

An ethnic group is a group of people defined by common cultural and physical characteristics (usually).

For example, a Chinese man who grew up in China is more likely to act and fully feel Chinese. However, a European who also grew up in China may still not feel to actually be Chinese.

[Libertarian California]

Well there are inherent differences between various ethnic groups.

There are 'inherent differences' between two parents and their Trisomy kid, too - that doesn't mean they are different races.

Of course not. But there are differences between ethnic groups. For example, sub-Saharan ethnic groups have a slightly different skull shape than a European ethnic group. The fact that you can tell what part of the world is someone is from by looking at them tells that there are some differences between groups of people.

This is no way translates into superiority however.

[Tahar Joblis]

Surprise surprise.

Surprise, surprise, science can - and has - moved on with more sophisticated techniques than whether or not a particular allelle is only found in certain populations. Using multiple allelles and classing them via clustering techniques makes the race categories visible in, say, the US, where we have large and distinct migrations from previously geographically separate populations.

It has been an ideologically "correct" view to say that race has no biological basis. Forensic anthropologists and geneticists, however, can respectively identify racial categories with high accuracy by examining skull features and by genotyping.

Yes, the thinking by geneticists twenty years ago was that the races were genetically indistinguishable on the whole; but now we have much better sequence data and much more sophisticated statistical techniques. The more sophisticated techniques can be used to generate metrics which distinguish between historically disjoint populations, i.e., modern race categories. It turns out that we can be if anything more accurate with a genotype in predicting someone's self-identified race than visually.

What's a "real" biological category? No more and no less than something which can be distinguished meaningfully objectively and not merely subjectively.

[North Stradia]

No. However, some classes are inherently superior to others.

[Occupied Deutschland]

No. However, some classes are inherently superior to others.

Obviously. Mathematics > Physics > Chemistry > Economics > Philosophy > etc.

Of course, which classes those are is subjective, so it's rather pointless.

[Frisivisia]

No. However, some classes are inherently superior to others.

Obviously. Mathematics > Physics > Chemistry > Economics > Philosophy > etc.

Of course, which classes those are is subjective, so it's rather pointless.

Philosophy>History>Geography>Maths>Meths>Gym>Everything else

[Occupied Deutschland]

Obviously. Mathematics > Physics > Chemistry > Economics > Philosophy > etc.

Of course, which classes those are is subjective, so it's rather pointless.

Philosophy>History>Geography>Maths>Meths>Gym>Everything else

What're you talking about?

Nothing is better than meth class. I mean, for no other reason than the money you can make selling the stuff you make during class. Do you hate money or something? Communist.

[Regnum Dominae]

Obviously. Mathematics > Physics > Chemistry > Economics > Philosophy > etc.

Of course, which classes those are is subjective, so it's rather pointless.

Philosophy>History>Geography>Maths>Meths>Gym>Everything else

Meths?

[Hathradic States]

I find dog races superior to NASCAR, so maybe.

(serious: no. It is cultures that are superior to other cultures, and nations that are superior to other nations)

[Disserbia]

Fro example, I am ethnically pale so I eat a lot of sushi and complain about not having anything to chase my vodka with.

Ethnicity =/= skin color.

An ethnic group is a group of people defined by common cultural and physical characteristics (usually).

For example, a Chinese man who grew up in China is more likely to act and fully feel Chinese. However, a European who also grew up in China may still not feel to actually be Chinese.

Drunken sarcasm. I don't think that better is really something that can be quantified in this case, ethnicity or race. Well I don't believe in race, so there is that.

[Grave_n_idle]

Of course not. But there are differences between ethnic groups. For example, sub-Saharan ethnic groups have a slightly different skull shape than a European ethnic group. The fact that you can tell what part of the world is someone is from by looking at them tells that there are some differences between groups of people.

And yet the variation between 'sub-Saharan ethnic groups' is bigger than the difference between the sub-Saharan average, and some other ethnic group's average.

If 'difference' is our metric, then the two extremes within one ethnic groups should be considered different 'races', and the average within one group AND all the other groups - should be considered another 'race'.

That's the problem with arguing that these small superficial 'differences' define race.

This is no way translates into superiority however.

This much we agree on.

[Mkuki]

Considering there are no races, I'm gonna go with no.

[Milograd]

The Penn Relays are pretty swell.

[Evraim]

How gauche.

Gauche? That doesn't seem to contextually fit. Does it mean something else over here?

I was calling your characterization of reality awkward, essentially.

Philosophy>History>Geography>Maths>Meths>Gym>Everything else

Meths?

Haven't you studied meths? It's pretty much chemistry except with illicit drugs. I took it as an elective at my university last year.

[Grave_n_idle]

I was calling your characterization of reality awkward, essentially.

Ah. I found it rather beautiful, actually.

"There's real poetry in the real world. Science is the poetry of reality".

I find that a wonderful sentiment.

[Evraim]

I was calling your characterization of reality awkward, essentially.

Ah. I found it rather beautiful, actually.

"There's real poetry in the real world. Science is the poetry of reality".

I find that a wonderful sentiment.

Not Dawkins. The liberal bias of reality cliche. I adore Dawkins. He's so... passionate about science.

[Grave_n_idle]

Ah. I found it rather beautiful, actually.

"There's real poetry in the real world. Science is the poetry of reality".

I find that a wonderful sentiment.

Not Dawkins. The liberal bias of reality cliche. I adore Dawkins. He's so... passionate about science.

I'm a scientist and a poet. I think Dawkins is a scientist and a poet - he certainly expresses himself that way, so I have a lot of regard for how he expresses himself - and I love that quote.

The 'reality has a liberal bias' thing - it's a fraction of a Colbert quote:

"I know there are some polls out there saying this man has a 32% approval rating. But guys like us, we don't pay attention to the polls. We know that polls are just a collection of statistics that reflect what people are thinking in "reality." And reality has a well-known liberal bias."

...and it just seems so appropriate, so often.

It's not as beautiful, it may not even be true, but it feels true. And isn't that what matters?

[Norstal]

I mean honestly, at a first glance, it seems like this is just the kind of question a Neo Nazi or some kind of crazy fanatic would ask. After all, all human beings are special and just as good as any other, right? That's what most of us are taught by our parents, neighbors and schools. People have died to equality and for recognition of their race as an equal entity. And, after things such as segregation in the United States (or pretty much anywhere else the Colonial powers have been) as well as mass genocide in Europe (Holocaust, Serbia, and Middle East had Armenians), its not acceptable to really consider any race superior to another.

But, if you look closer, some races are doing much better in certain aspects. For an example, Asians in America. They had funny accents, dressed weird and still managed to struggle and fight to a pretty decent position in American society. Meanwhile, the Mexicans have no such luck and are often characterized as the epitome of stupidity and poverty in the USA. And then, you also have the fact that some races are physically stronger by nature; Africans are much more muscular in general.

Then we have Scandinavians who tend to be stronger and firmer than other Europeans, Asians, who tend to work harder and well, I can't think of anything for dem white folk. But, in all honesty, it does seem like some races are superior.
I personally believe that is because of historical and geographical factors. Geography forces people to live certain lifestyles that might affect their cultural values, and in turn their success in life. It also alters their physical traits through natural selection.

What's the opinion of the NS community?

Oh man, Asians are hard working? Someone should've told me before I went on a 24-hour video games binge.

[Kvatchdom]

Asians know how to fix the nation after a catastrophe better than most do, but I believe it has nothing to do with race.

[The Vermin Confederation of Mossflower]

1. First get rid of that red and black flag until you get some analysis. Same goes for the hammer and sickle and anarchy symbols. No one who asks such a question has the right to use the symbolism of freedom.
2. No. No races are inherently superior to others because race does not exist as a biological reality (it does exist as a cultural reality).

source:
http://wupa.wustl.edu/record_archive/19 ... races.html

I have to butt in for a moment.
Leftist overuse of the No True Scotsman argument is hilarious.


Carry on.

[Norstal]

Asians know how to fix the nation after a catastrophe better than most do, but I believe it has nothing to do with race.

So do the Germans? And the French too? Or the U.S if you count Civil War as a catastrophe.

[Kvatchdom]

Asians know how to fix the nation after a catastrophe better than most do, but I believe it has nothing to do with race.

So do the Germans? And the French too? Or the U.S if you count Civil War as a catastrophe.

America hasn't done a good job, and wars aren't counted. Don't know about the others.