There's no fallacy in asking if evolution did or did not affect the mental or physical capability of all races.
To say that's fallacious is to say that all questions of dubious scientific background are fallacious.I caaaaan't wait to seeee this.What genetic parameters would you use to distinguish between races? Which races are actual races?
Furthermore, see my edit to that post.
If you wish to limit the descriptions to the source you used earlier, though the fallacy youare guilty of is:
"Failure To State:
if you make enough attacks, and ask enough questions, you may never have to actually define your own position on the topic."
A List Of Fallacious Arguments
Having said that.. in theory isolated populations can acquire traits inherently selected within that group that would infer a survival advantage within that group or environment. So different groups could theoretically attain a different type of intelligence. Hypothetically one group may gain an advantage for intuitive thinking necessary to reach quick decisions in a rapidly changing environment (solo hunting in a jungle perhaps), while another group somewhere else may develop a better knack for for planning and foresight -a more methodical analytical intelligence - (perhaps a group that would need a well planned organized hunting strategy.. such as an Eskimo whale hunt). Now these are just random examples, and in no way reflect what may or may not be reality, I do not know. This also brings us back to the problem that we have no way to accurately measure any slight variations there may or may not be in a broadly categorized definition of intelligence, yet alone to accurately measure variations in a specific type of intelligence.
So the answer is we do not know for sure, we have no way of telling, but given different environments and different pressures evolutionary processes can cause this to occur. We have not had any "races" isolated long enough for such pressures to manifest themselves sufficiently for us to even be able to measure them.
This is further compounded by the immense degree of variations in intelligence within any given group. It is easy to isolate and measure something such as melanin level where there is very little variation within a population. When you are talking intelligence any given sample can have a range that varies from imbecile to genius - and even the supposed imbeciles could in fact have aspects of intelligence that could easily be construed as being genius themselves (ie: idiot savants), while a genius could be rock dumb when it came to common sense or intuition.
Last edited by marduc; 09-15-11 at 01:52 PM.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition
Drugs are bad, prohibition is worse
you can't have it both ways. can't blame black failure on slavery and then cry that environment doesn't affect IQ.
FWIW, my "sentiment" isn't that black failure is due to a lack of IQ, it's due to a lack of motivation. they are intelligent enough to succeed, many of them just choose not to. there is a difference.
Race (classification of humans) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I did not think "race" could be considered by others to be such an ambiguous word.