A final talk about race?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
21-11-2015, 10:08 AM
RE: A final talk about race?
My biggest issue with race.
So I'm very very distantly Aboriginal Australian. My great great great great grandmother is listed as "half caste". I have a couple of features you could guess came from there, but basically I'm white as an Englishman. So I stand proud and teach my children to stand proud about this tenuous connection.

So it is not uncommon for official documentation to ask the question about aboriginality. So I say yes. My children say yes. But sometimes we end up with benefits because of that. My daughter was offered a place in a critical thinking course out of the local university's philosophy department because she placed in the top 5% of children in the state on a standardised test. It was only after she was enrolled I found out it was because she was in the top 5% AND identifies as Aboriginal.

So when asked that question I hesitate. I don't want to say no, but I don't want to be taking advantage of programs and benefits intended for people who need support that we don't need.

Give me your argument in the form of a published paper, and then we can start to talk.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 6 users Like Hafnof's post
27-04-2016, 09:18 PM
RE: A final talk about race?
(20-11-2015 01:58 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is greater genetic variation within 'races' than between them.

Race is a human construct.
From wikipedia entry "Lewontin's fallacy"
"Edwards argued that while Lewontin's statements on variability are correct when examining the frequency of different alleles (variants of a particular gene) at an individual locus (the location of a particular gene) between individuals, it is nonetheless possible to classify individuals into different racial groups with an accuracy that approaches 100 percent when one takes into account the frequency of the alleles at several loci at the same time. This happens because differences in the frequency of alleles at different loci are correlated across populations — the alleles that are more frequent in a population at two or more loci are correlated when we consider the two populations simultaneously. Or in other words, the frequency of the alleles tends to cluster differently for different populations.[8]

In Edwards's words, "most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data." These relationships can be extracted using commonly used ordination and cluster analysis techniques. Edwards argued that, even if the probability of misclassifying an individual based on the frequency of alleles at a single locus is as high as 30 percent (as Lewontin reported in 1972), the misclassification probability becomes close to zero if enough loci are studied.[9]

Edwards's paper stated that the underlying logic was discussed in the early years of the 20th century. Edwards wrote that he and Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza had presented a contrasting analysis to Lewontin's, using very similar data, already at the 1963 International Congress of Genetics. Lewontin participated in the conference but did not refer to this in his later paper. Edwards argued that Lewontin used his analysis to attack human classification in science for social reasons.[9]"

That humans are classifiable into races and that that those races have meaningful differences is literally as plain as the nose on your face.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Livemike's post
27-04-2016, 11:16 PM
RE: A final talk about race?
(27-04-2016 09:18 PM)Livemike Wrote:  
(20-11-2015 01:58 AM)Chas Wrote:  There is greater genetic variation within 'races' than between them.

Race is a human construct.
From wikipedia entry "Lewontin's fallacy"
"Edwards argued that while Lewontin's statements on variability are correct when examining the frequency of different alleles (variants of a particular gene) at an individual locus (the location of a particular gene) between individuals, it is nonetheless possible to classify individuals into different racial groups with an accuracy that approaches 100 percent when one takes into account the frequency of the alleles at several loci at the same time. This happens because differences in the frequency of alleles at different loci are correlated across populations — the alleles that are more frequent in a population at two or more loci are correlated when we consider the two populations simultaneously. Or in other words, the frequency of the alleles tends to cluster differently for different populations.[8]

In Edwards's words, "most of the information that distinguishes populations is hidden in the correlation structure of the data." These relationships can be extracted using commonly used ordination and cluster analysis techniques. Edwards argued that, even if the probability of misclassifying an individual based on the frequency of alleles at a single locus is as high as 30 percent (as Lewontin reported in 1972), the misclassification probability becomes close to zero if enough loci are studied.[9]

Edwards's paper stated that the underlying logic was discussed in the early years of the 20th century. Edwards wrote that he and Luigi Luca Cavalli-Sforza had presented a contrasting analysis to Lewontin's, using very similar data, already at the 1963 International Congress of Genetics. Lewontin participated in the conference but did not refer to this in his later paper. Edwards argued that Lewontin used his analysis to attack human classification in science for social reasons.[9]"

That humans are classifiable into races and that that those races have meaningful differences is literally as plain as the nose on your face.

From that same wikipedia article
Quote:Similarly, biological anthropologist Jonathan Marks agrees with Edwards that correlations between geographical areas and genetics obviously exist in human populations, but goes on to note that "What is unclear is what this has to do with 'race' as that term has been used through much in the twentieth century - the mere fact that we can find groups to be different and can reliably allot people to them is trivial. Again, the point of the theory of race was to discover large clusters of people that are principally homogeneous within and heterogeneous between, contrasting groups. Lewontin's analysis shows that such groups do not exist in the human species, and Edwards' critique does not contradict that interpretation."[6]

The view that while geographic clustering of biological traits does exist this does not lend biological validity to racial groups was proposed by several evolutionary anthropologists and geneticists prior to the publication of Edwards critique of Lewontin.[7][16][17][18][19]

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like morondog's post
28-04-2016, 09:33 PM
RE: A final talk about race?
<insert zombie meme here>

Don't let those gnomes and their illusions get you down. They're just gnomes and illusions.

--Jake the Dog, Adventure Time

Alouette, je te plumerai.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 09:40 PM (This post was last modified: 28-04-2016 09:45 PM by cactus.)
RE: A final talk about race?
[Image: the-fuck-is-this.jpeg]




If we came from dust, then why is there still dust?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
28-04-2016, 10:12 PM
RE: A final talk about race?
The tortoise has finally beat Achilles, race over.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: