Are some races inherently superior to others?

[Aurora Novus]

EDIT: Scientifically, you are correct, however with popular usages; race is generally defined by skin colour.

I understand that is the popular usage; I'm saying the popular usage is wrong, and ridiculous. If we go by the popular usage, any heritable genetic difference could constitute a "different race". Over time, if not already, this would mean every single person on the planet is a member of a distinct race of human beings. Which is just as idiotic as it sounds.

[The Tectonic Plates]

While those other physical traits do come with it, what makes or breaks the definition is most often skin colour.

Again, no, that's not correct at all. Skin colour itself has little to do with how biologists classify a species' subspecies.

Allow me to quote the Human Genome Project on this.

"DNA studies do not indicate that separate classifiable subspecies (races) exist within modern humans. While different genes for physical traits such as skin and hair color can be identified between individuals, no consistent patterns of genes across the human genome exist to distinguish one race from another. There also is no genetic basis for divisions of human ethnicity. People who have lived in the same geographic region for many generations may have some alleles in common, but no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other."

Also no, phenotype expressions refer to what is caused by genetics, tanning doesn't change your genetics.

True, my error.

Again, scientifically you are completely correct, I can not deny that.

However, the way the common individual handles race and deals with race has more to do with Skin Colour than anything else. That is why the concept of race irks me so much. The one phenotype expression has caused so much strife and problems in the world and it's so miniscule in genetics.

[The Tectonic Plates]

EDIT: Scientifically, you are correct, however with popular usages; race is generally defined by skin colour.

I understand that is the popular usage; I'm saying the popular usage is wrong, and ridiculous. If we go by the popular usage, any heritable genetic difference could constitute a "different race". Over time, if not already, this would mean every single person on the planet is a member of a distinct race of human beings. Which is just as idiotic as it sounds.

I agree, the popular usage is stupid, and as of such should be dropped. The shear variety in Human phenotype expressions, and if they were all considered, would've lead to thousands of races by now.

[Evraim]

Yes it does. An illusion does not exist because people think it is real. They may believe it is real, treat it like it is real, and govern their lives off the assumption it is real; but that does not make it any less of an illusion, a fabrication.

To put it in perspective, by your reasoning, if enough people thought having red hair meant you were of a separate race, it would be so. Would you not agree this is folly?

I think the current racial classifications are folly, but that doesn't alter the fact that our society and identities are affected by racial classifications. By your definition, wouldn't one assume that nation-states and any other social institutions or forces are illusions?

Race is a biological concept that has been disproven.
Just like geocentrism & spontaneous generation have been disproven.

Hence why I called it a sociological concept, not a biological reality.

[Aurora Novus]

Again, scientifically you are completely correct, I can not deny that.

However, the way the common individual handles race and deals with race has more to do with Skin Colour than anything else. That is why the concept of race irks me so much. The one phenotype expression has caused so much strife and problems in the world and it's so miniscule in genetics.

Agreed.

I agree, the popular usage is stupid, and as of such should be dropped. The shear variety in Human phenotype expressions, and if they were all considered, would've lead to thousands of races by now.

Also agreed.

[Aurora Novus]

Yes it does. An illusion does not exist because people think it is real. They may believe it is real, treat it like it is real, and govern their lives off the assumption it is real; but that does not make it any less of an illusion, a fabrication.

To put it in perspective, by your reasoning, if enough people thought having red hair meant you were of a separate race, it would be so. Would you not agree this is folly?

I think the current racial classifications are folly, but that doesn't alter the fact that our society and identities are affected by racial classifications.

It is affected by it, certainly, but what I'm saying is that makes "race" no more real. An illusion is an illusion, regardless of how many people believe it and are affected by people believing it.

By your definition, wouldn't one assume that nation-states and any other social institutions or forces are illusions?

I'm not seeing the connection. Could you elaborate?

[George Lincoln Rockwell]

Yes, Watch some of Jared Taylor's Videos. Some Races are Superior to others in certain fields.

[Qanchia]

From a Christian perspective(not necessarily mine), Noah getting drunk on the grape juice he drank from his own vineyard caused him to curse his youngest son and to praise his oldest son, thereby the youngest son becoming the head chief of the tribe that will proliferate into an entire African tribe, and the oldest son the same for Europe.

I've been a Christian for decades and I've never come across of this supposedly Christian perspective. It was probably made up by anti-Christians to make Christians appear racist.

[Evraim]

I'm not seeing the connection. Could you elaborate?

The division of landmasses into countries and people into ethnic groups are as illusionary as racial categorizations. By your reasoning, we should argue that neither of these is real. This would be fine if we only concerned ourselves with the hard sciences, but the fact of the matter is that soft sciences, such as sociology and political science, exist. Race is somewhat important in those studies.

[Conscentia]

Race is a biological concept that has been disproven.
Just like geocentrism & spontaneous generation have been disproven.

Hence why I called it a sociological concept, not a biological reality.

But it isn't a sociological concept. It's a (disproven) biological concept that is wrongly still accepted in society. Being accept by society doesn't make it sociological.

Miasmas didn't become a sociological concept just because people believed in them, even though they didn't exist.

[Evraim]

But it isn't a sociological concept. It's a (disproven) biological concept that is wrongly still accepted in society. Being accept by society doesn't make it sociological.

Shall I quote my sociology textbook, which contains a whole chapter on race, to settle this matter?

To address your other example, did Miasma Theory affect social stratification, access to social institutions, social inequality, or anything of the sort? Does it influence the manner in which individuals form their identities or relate to other individuals? Has it had an enduring effect on our society?

[Disserbia]

But it isn't a sociological concept. It's a (disproven) biological concept that is wrongly still accepted in society. Being accept by society doesn't make it sociological.

Shall I quote my sociology textbook, which contains a whole chapter on race, to settle this matter?

I already fell asleep.

[Greenvul]

I believe every race is better at one thing than the other races, but no race is all around better than any other. Like class types or rock paper scissors. We're all just better at doing certain things, but I don't believed in a OP race.

[Aurora Novus]

I'm not seeing the connection. Could you elaborate?

The division of landmasses into countries and people into ethnic groups are as illusionary as racial categorizations. By your reasoning, we should argue that neither of these is real.

Ah, I see what you are saying. And yes, I would argue they are nothing more than illusionary concepts, and should be treated as such.

This would be fine if we only concerned ourselves with the hard sciences, but the fact of the matter is that soft sciences, such as sociology and political science, exist. Race is somewhat important in those studies.

Only in that these fields study the effects of believing in race. Again, just because something is illusionary, does not mean people will not be affected by a belief in it. While the object itself may not be real, people's beliefs and reactions and treatment of one another, are most certainly real. And soft sciences such as Sociology study those effects.

[Evraim]

I already fell asleep.

Already? A pity.

[Qanchia]

Yes. Race exists as a sociological concept. The fact that it is not a biological reality does not mean that it does not exist.

Yes it does. An illusion does not exist because people think it is real. They may believe it is real, treat it like it is real, and govern their lives off the assumption it is real; but that does not make it any less of an illusion, a fabrication.

To put it in perspective, by your reasoning, if enough people thought having red hair meant you were of a separate race, it would be so. Would you not agree this is folly?

By the same reasoning, I can also claim that there is no such thing as gender (at least in a given society), because variations between gender norms of the "same" gender may be greater across the different cultures of the world, than differences between two genders in the same society. But that doesn't make it go away.

[Conscentia]

But it isn't a sociological concept. It's a (disproven) biological concept that is wrongly still accepted in society. Being accept by society doesn't make it sociological.

Shall I quote my sociology textbook, which contains a whole chapter on race, to settle this matter?

To address your other example, did Miasma Theory affect social stratification, access to social institutions, social inequality, or anything of the sort? Does it influence the manner in which individuals form their identities or relate to other individuals? Has it had an enduring effect on our society?

I never said that the concept of race does not have sociological effects, I'm saying that race itself is not sociological.

[Meryuma]

Yes, Watch some of Jared Taylor's Videos. Some Races are Superior to others in certain fields.

Which races are there and how are they distinguished?

[Conservative Idealism]

Grouping people into groups (for instance, race) is a characteristic devised by the human mind...I think to prevent overload.

Despite this, it is important to remember that all men are created equal, right-wise, but people are not all born exactly the same nor live under the exact same conditions. Some people are better at certain aspects than others, and I don't see why race factors in.

Also, keep in mind that attributes attributed to races are often the result of history. Quartering African-Americans on the poor side of American cities, for example, has worked against them. They are perceived as inferior, violent, or other things by the uninformed based on their race when in fact it was simply their upbringing that handicapped them. Also, there are many who have defied the odds anyway and became highly successful!

It's not about the group of men. It's about the man.

[Divair]

Of course not.

[Evraim]

Ah, I see what you are saying. And yes, I would argue they are nothing more than illusionary concepts, and should be treated as such.

I assume you reject the existence of universal human rights as well? Should we treat those as though they are illusionary concepts too?

Only in that these fields study the effects of believing in race. Again, just because something is illusionary, does not mean people will not be affected by a belief in it. While the object itself may not be real, people's beliefs and reactions and treatment of one another, are most certainly real. And soft sciences such as Sociology study those effects.

Wouldn't the way in which racial categorization creates distinct social groups ensure that it possesses a manifest existence? After all, most people living in the West are capable of distinguishing between separate racial groups because our methods of socialization have taught us what characteristics and stereotypes relate to one or another group. This means that, while there are no discrete biological differences between all members of one race and all members of another, there is a definite difference in how those people are treated and interact within society as a whole.

[Aurora Novus]

By the same reasoning, I can also claim that there is no such thing as gender (at least in a given society), because variations between gender norms of the "same" gender may be greater across the different cultures of the world, than differences between two genders in the same society.

Indeed, and I have argued just that previously on this very site in fact. Gender is an illusionary concept. But that is neither here nor there in this topic.

But that doesn't make it go away.

That depends on what you mean by "go away". Again, just because an object or idea is illusionary, does not mean people's beliefs and actions based upon beliefs are not real. I can believe that, for instance, having lighter skin makes you a lesser being, and worthy of death. Is this true? No. But is my reaction real? A lifeless corpse on the ground would imply, yes, it is.

But just as something being illusionary doesn't mean people's reactions are illusionary, while people's treatment of one another based off of the belief in an illusion may be real, that does not suddenly make the illusion itself, real.

Case in point: Religion.

[Evraim]

I never said that the concept of race does not have sociological effects, I'm saying that race itself is not sociological.

Why not?

[Conscentia]

I never said that the concept of race does not have sociological effects, I'm saying that race itself is not sociological.

Why not?

Because it's a biological concept - it's based on the idea that humans divide into separate groups on a biological basis.

[Aurora Novus]

I assume you reject the existence of universal human rights as well? Should we treat those as though they are illusionary concepts too?

"Rights" themselves are an illusionary concept, as they imply some form of inherentness to the universe. Rights are a man-made concept.

Wouldn't the way in which racial categorization creates distinct social groups ensure that it possesses a manifest existence?

Race deals with biology, not social organization. So no. By this line of reasoning, when athenians believed in their pantheon of gods, those gods actually existed...and then ceased to exist when people stopped believing in them en mass. Which is a ridiculous claim to make.

After all, most people living in the West are capable of distinguishing between separate racial groups because our methods of socialization have taught us what characteristics and stereotypes relate to one or another group. This means that, while there are no discrete biological differences between all members of one race and all members of another, there is a definite difference in how those people are treated and interact within society as a whole.

Like I said, treatment based upon the belief in an illusion can be real; but that does not make the illusion real.

You can say "we treat people with different skin colour as being part of separate races, therefore meaning races exist". However, unless we're changing the definition of race, this is not so.

And if we are changing the definition of race, putting aside the fact that we are no longer working with the original illusionary concept, we would be changing it in such a away as to render it meaningless, as every person would arguably be their own distinct race.