Matt C was right? A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History

[Roger Bacon]

Can we go there?

Political Correctness Makes Race and Genetics Taboo in the West, Which is Why China is Winning

by Milo Yiannopoulos 19 May 2014, 2:30 AM PDT 40 post a comment

Most scientists will tell you that race has no biological basis—it is, in academic-speak, a “social construct.” But a new book by distinguished journalist Nicholas Wade challenges that assumption, concluding that race is real and human social behaviour is subject to natural selection just like everything else.

As the New York Review of Books put it, in its coverage of Wade’s A Troublesome Inheritance: Genes, Race and Human History, there is now a “statistical sense” in which races are real. Scientists can tell, based on genetic variance, which continent a DNA sample comes from. That might not sound revolutionary to you, but it’s only recently that we’ve had the computer processing power to do it.

Wade doesn’t shy away from the disquieting implications of his theories: our genes, he says, could explain why some countries are wealthy while others languish in penury. In fact, the more we discover about ourselves from genomics, the more it becomes apparent that science and ideology are on a collision course.

read more: http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/05/19/science-and-racism-book

[Archer77]

Im reading the book now.

[headhuntersix]

Why is this a hard concept...oh I guess because if you live your life based on hurt feelings and obtaining an aggrieved standing it is.

[syntaxmachine]

Politically correct persons' hope that their labeling of race as a social construct will block any inferences made on the basis of race is unsound: chairs are social constructs -- not belonging to any science as a theoretical posit and apparently existing merely as somewhat arbitrarily gerrymandered concatenations of atoms -- yet we can still infer that being hit over the head with one will hurt.

So too with race: there aren't purely biological necessary and sufficient conditions for belonging to the class 'African American,' but we can still infer and generalize on the basis of the somewhat arbitrary set of properties that we gerrymander into our social construct, e.g., we can infer about persons born in the US with significant genetic lineage leading back to Africa with albedos between x and y that they often evince above average fried chicken loving behavior, or that they evince higher rates of diabetes.

Fitting Mr Wade's claims into the above construal of social constructs, he is simply saying that the genetic portions of our social constructs of race allow us to make inferences and generalizations about the objects denoted by such concepts, a perfectly reasonable claim. And a perfectly uninteresting one.

[Roger Bacon]

Politically correct persons' hope that their labeling of race as a social construct will block any inferences made on the basis of race is unsound: chairs are social constructs -- not belonging to any science as a theoretical posit and apparently existing merely as somewhat arbitrarily gerrymandered concatenations of atoms -- yet we can still infer that being hit over the head with one will hurt.

So too with race: there aren't purely biological necessary and sufficient conditions for belonging to the class 'African American,' but we can still infer and generalize on the basis of the somewhat arbitrary set of properties that we gerrymander into our social construct, e.g., we can infer about persons born in the US with significant genetic lineage leading back to Africa with albedos between x and y that they evince above average fried chicken loving behavior.

LOL'd hard at how you wrapped up that scholarly post!!

[Dos Equis]

Aside from the fact that race-based statistics are unreliable given the mixture of ethnicities across the country, what is the point?  Are we going to develop policy based on race?  Are you going to form judgments about an entire class of people? 

[Roger Bacon]

Aside from the fact that race-based statistics are unreliable given the mixture of ethnicities across the country, what is the point?  Are we going to develop policy based on race?  Are you going to form judgments about an entire class of people?  

Immigration policy I hope, especially in European countries that haven't been largely affected by third world peoples.

[Archer77]

Aside from the fact that race-based statistics are unreliable given the mixture of ethnicities across the country, what is the point?  Are we going to develop policy based on race?  Are you going to form judgments about an entire class of people? 

Race based statistics are reliable and consistent.    We already have policies based on race.

[Dos Equis]

Race based statistics are reliable and consistent.    We already have policies based on race.

Really?  What race is the president? 

We have lots of policies that are unreliable and wrongheaded. 

[Dos Equis]

Immigration policy I hope, especially in European countries that haven't been largely affected by third world peoples.

How exactly would that work?  Select an entire race and preclude them from entering the country and/or becoming citizens? 

[Archer77]

Really?  What race is the president? 

We have lots of policies that are unreliable and wrongheaded. 

The book actually addresses mixed race individuals.  Race isnt as static now that populations are mingling but that doesn't mean the stats are wrong and useless.   

[Archer77]

How exactly would that work?  Select an entire race and preclude them from entering the country and/or becoming citizens? 

I dont see a problem with that being the case in Europe.

[Dos Equis]

The book actually addresses mixed race individuals.  Race isnt as static now that populations are mingling but that doesn't mean the stats are wrong and useless.   

What does it say about mixed race individuals?  And what race is the president? 

Race has never really been static.  At least not in modern history. 

I live in the most diverse state in the country.  The average person walking down the street here is probably a mix of at least two or more ethnicities.  And although most states are not like mine, there are people who are "chop suey" all over the country.   

[Archer77]

What does it say about mixed race individuals?  And what race is the president? 

Race has never really been static.  At least not in modern history. 

I live in the most diverse state in the country.  The average person walking down the street here is probably a mix of at least two or more ethnicities.  And although most states are not like mine, there are people who are "chop suey" all over the country.   

He would be just that, mixed race.  Race is just a population group that share a genetic history and traits.

[Dos Equis]

I dont see a problem with that being the case in Europe.

What do they do in Europe? 

[Dos Equis]

He would be just that, mixed race.  Race is just a population group that share a genetic history and traits.

What genetic traits does the president have and which ones are more dominant than others?  (More of a rhetorical question.) 

And what happens with someone like Tiger Woods, who has a mix of about four different ethnicities? 

What does this book you're referencing say about race-based shared genetic history and traits? 

[Archer77]

What genetic traits does the president have and which ones are more dominant than others?  (More of a rhetorical question.) 

And what happens with someone like Tiger Woods, who has a mix of about four different ethnicities? 

What does this book you're referencing say about race-based shared genetic history and traits? 

You'd have to test his DNA to determine the composition of genes and how they operate.   Im not finished with the book yet.  A particular trait becomes prominent in a population when the adaption it possess proves useful or is acquired through sexual selection.   By sexual selection I mean its a sexually desirable trait so its selected for and passed on to offspring.   

[Dos Equis]

You'd have to test his DNA to determine the composition of genes and how they operate.   Im not finished with the book yet.  A particular trait becomes prominent in a population when the adaption it possess proves useful or is acquired through sexual selection.   By sexual selection I mean its a sexually desirable trait so its selected for and passed on to offspring.   

What kind of traits? 

[Archer77]

What kind of traits? 

Depends on the population and what enviormental and/or social pressures they were adapting to.  The most obvious are physical traits we can see like skin color and hair texture.  Some you can't see such as the MAOA gene that has been linked to impulsively and aggression.  The rate of this gene and its two allele version vary in populations.

[Dos Equis]

Depends on the population and what enviormental and/or social pressures they were adapting to.  The most obvious are physical traits we can see like skin color and hair texture.  Some you can't see such as the MAOA gene that has been linked to impulsively and aggression.  The rate of this gene and its two allele version vary in populations.

Thanks.  Not exactly earth shattering (skin color, etc.). 

So the book is saying the MAOA gene makes certain races more aggressive? 

[Archer77]

Thanks.  Not exactly earth shattering (skin color, etc.). 

So the book is saying the MAOA gene makes certain races more aggressive? 

The book is pretty careful not to venture into supremacist territory or label particular groups as inferior.  Mainly it deconstructs the argument that race is a social construct.

[Dos Equis]

The book is pretty careful not to venture into supremacist territory or label particular groups as inferior.  Mainly it deconstructs the argument that race is a social construct.

That's the whole point of studies like this, whether they acknowledge it or not. 

[Archer77]

That's the whole point of studies like this, whether they acknowledge it or not. 

I dont agree.  The point as I see it is to is to understand and acknowledge the fundamental differences between people.   

[Dos Equis]

I dont agree.  The point as I see it is to is to understand and acknowledge the fundamental differences between people.   

And then what? 

[RRKore]

I dont agree.  The point as I see it is to is to understand and acknowledge the fundamental differences between people.   

I think BB means that for some people the whole issue will be about justification for racial discrimination and he's right about that.

Personally, I think the subject is fascinating.  

I will say that tracking mental traits, even emotional ones, and linking them to certain alleles (sp?) seems like it'd be a whole lot more difficult than doing the same with physical traits, I think.

I mean, it's pretty obvious which parent red-headed Blake Griffin gets his jumping ability from but I'm not so sure about his pugnaciousness and general douchebaggery, lol.