more than 3.
Me and then the rest of you lowly peons.
Last edited by Ikari; 12-14-12 at 10:21 AM.
You know the time is right to take control, we gotta take offense against the status quo
Originally Posted by A. de Tocqueville
Does that make race useless? No. Does it make it entirely arbitrary? No.
It's a cheap and statistically useful surrogate for genetic heredity, at least until individualised genetic maps are in use in medicine and our knowledge of biological mechanisms are fully developed (the latter of which did and do depend in large part on comparative study of the race model).
There is an arbitrary component to any grouping mechanism developed by man. This goes for controversies regarding the definition of species and other taxonomic strata. Race just happens to be far more arbitrary.
If you have 2 arabs with 1000 candies each, no candies would be entirely different. Because the differences between people of the same race are not statistically measurable within 0.x%, but rather, with less.
So if you have 2 arabs with 10.000 candies each, then yes, you will get more than 2 candies of different sortiments. And here you are talking about genes that are unique to each race, that make each race a race basically. So within those 0.1-0.2% differences between races, you have 100% different genes that are unique to a certain race. And out of those, you get a certain % which is common to all members of that race and a % that varies, giving each one of us our uniqueness in all aspects.
Now. The 99.8% that is common between all human subspecies also varies. To give an example. Height is a gene within that 99.8%. All humans have height. Within the DNA sequence, the gene that determines your height is located in the same place in all human beings. So if it is, lets say, the 5th gene in the DNA, it will be the 5th gene in me, you and everybody else on the planet. And all human beings have it. It just has a different value in it that says that I am 1.8m tall and you are whatever size you are. So this is why the sortiment and candy example is just a basic representation of what I am trying to say. Because if we get down in all the sciency stuff, almost no "candy" is transferrable because each "candy" has a certain information about me. So if I give you the 5th candy in my candy box, you need to give me back the candy at the same position, or else I turn into a a new subspecies that is heightless :P.
An unhealthy way of dealing with it is to ignore it, call it a "social construct". The dumbest way to deal with it is to say that there are no races and that there is just 1 race, the human race, instead of correctly identifying it as the human species with different subspecies. But by far the worst way to "cure" the race problem is to cheer for the destruction of the diversity that the the simple fact that humanity has various races. If we would have no races, just 1 race, we would be less than dogs. Dogs have different breeds (races), each with its own unique traits. Well, maybe dogs are bad example because there is no human equivalent to the chiuahua. But rather, humans are more like wolves. There are a great deal of wolf subspecies, each subspecies being different than the other due to the fact that it evolved and grew in a different environment and because of that, the Canidae branch of the animal kingdom is much more interesting.
"Those who do not learn from history and condemned to relive it".
"There are those who will debate the necessity of wilderness, I will not, either you know it in your bones or you are very very old". Aldo Leopold - Sand County Almanac
"The crisis will end when fear changes sides" - Pablo Iglesias Turrión
"Austerity is used as a cover to reconfigure society and increase inequality and injustice." - Jeremy Corbyn