First of all, niether is Israel, Jews come from the caucaus mountains. Second maybe a country that did something to the jews should have to fork something over. You know. Something really really bad.
Intra-racial Races
Started by
Korhend
, Sep 22 2004 09:03 PM
60 replies to this topic
#1
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 22 September 2004 - 09:03 PM
#2
arunma
-
- Members
-
- 3,615 posts
Physics and math maniac
- Location:University of Minnesota
- Gender:Male
Posted 22 September 2004 - 09:14 PM
Well there are two considerations we have to make here. First, Jews aren't a race, they're a nationality. You've got white Jews, black Jews, middle eastern Jews, and Indian Jews (the kind from India).Originally posted by Korhend@Sep 22 2004, 09:03 PM
First of all, niether is Israel, Jews come from the caucaus mountains. Second maybe a country that did something to the jews should have to fork something over. You know. Something really really bad.
Secondly, Israel has existed since at least 600 BC (again, if you ignore the Bible).
#3
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 22 September 2004 - 09:20 PM
Well depends on how specific you want to be, but generally the Jewish race (I call them that not because of there religion, but because it is a race) started in the caucaus mountains in the dim days of man (thats if you wanna believe evolution)
#4
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 22 September 2004 - 09:30 PM
First off, Race doesn't exist.Originally posted by Korhend@Sep 22 2004, 09:20 PM
Well depends on how specific you want to be, but generally the Jewish race (I call them that not because of there religion, but because it is a race) started in the caucaus mountains in the dim days of man (thats if you wanna believe evolution)
Second, We actually started in Modern-day Iraq, moved to Modern-Day Palestine, from there to Egypt, Ethiopia and Palestine, back to Iraq, into Persia, into Palestine again, then BAM! Conquered by Alexander. You know the rest, Diaspora all over the globe. There's no shortage of place which equally could and couldn't be the homeland.
#5
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 22 September 2004 - 09:46 PM
then why can forensics tell us peoples skin color by bone structure? Why does AIDS grow at an exponential rate in african's cells compared to a europeans?
#6
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 22 September 2004 - 09:48 PM
That's ethnicity. Race means genome, and none of those things are in ours. Those are individual, hereditary differences, but as "racially" meaningful as red hair.
#7
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 23 September 2004 - 06:26 PM
Your right Race is broken down into 5 races which are broken down into ethnicities. Jews fall under a Causoid Race of Caucasian ethnicity.Originally posted by Alakhriveion@Sep 22 2004, 09:48 PM
That's ethnicity. Race means genome, and none of those things are in ours. Those are individual, hereditary differences, but as "racially" meaningful as red hair.
#8
Custommagnum
-
- Members
-
- 303 posts
Journeyman
Posted 23 September 2004 - 07:56 PM
Five races... I thought there were three... but I don't remember the names right now...
But I'm pretty sure there are three.
But I'm pretty sure there are three.
#9
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 23 September 2004 - 08:08 PM
Race=Species. Humans aren't different enough to be "races." We have ONE Genome.Originally posted by Korhend@Sep 23 2004, 06:26 PM
Your right Race is broken down into 5 races which are broken down into ethnicities. Jews fall under a Causoid Race of Caucasian ethnicity.
#10
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 23 September 2004 - 08:27 PM
Someones been reading to much tolkien
Race: Noun 1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the White race.
The five scientifically backed races are Caucasoids, Mongloids, Negroids, Capoids, and Australoids
Race: Noun 1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the White race.
The five scientifically backed races are Caucasoids, Mongloids, Negroids, Capoids, and Australoids
#11
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 23 September 2004 - 08:34 PM
Linguistics and science are seperate here. The word race is used in that way, conceded, but it's biologically incorrect and therefore innapplicable as evidence. Different species have different Genome. Remember, chimps are only 3% different from us in that respect- a real, racial difference like that wouldn't allow interbreeding.
#12
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 23 September 2004 - 10:06 PM
Again this definition has no basis in fact
Biology.
1. An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.
example of different subspecies is the difference of say.... Bengal Tiger from an indo-chinese Can you spot the difference?
Biology.
1. An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.
example of different subspecies is the difference of say.... Bengal Tiger from an indo-chinese Can you spot the difference?
#13
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 23 September 2004 - 11:13 PM
Again, interbreeding is a no. As long as you can mate, there's no differentiation in anything.
Are there hereditary differences? Yes. Are these widespread? Yes. Does this make the use of "race" acceptable? No. Anyway, can we get back to the original topic?
Are there hereditary differences? Yes. Are these widespread? Yes. Does this make the use of "race" acceptable? No. Anyway, can we get back to the original topic?
#14
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 24 September 2004 - 02:06 PM
Would you prefer the term "sub-species"? Maybe you should split the topics.Originally posted by Alakhriveion@Sep 23 2004, 11:13 PM
Again, interbreeding is a no. As long as you can mate, there's no differentiation in anything.
Are there hereditary differences? Yes. Are these widespread? Yes. Does this make the use of "race" acceptable? No. Anyway, can we get back to the original topic?
#15
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 24 September 2004 - 02:07 PM
Oh, yeah. I'm a mod. 
#16
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 24 September 2004 - 02:11 PM
Anyway, sub-species is no better. I suppose the technical term would be "breed," althoug that does have nasty connotations.
#17
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 24 September 2004 - 02:15 PM
Sub-species and breed both have bad connotations. They would both lead to ideas that one was inherently superior.
Alak, Korhend has quoted two different dictionaries to bring you the accepted definition of race. What more do you want?
The idea of races being different species doesn't come from biology. It comes from Science Fiction.
Alak, Korhend has quoted two different dictionaries to bring you the accepted definition of race. What more do you want?
The idea of races being different species doesn't come from biology. It comes from Science Fiction.
#18
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 24 September 2004 - 02:20 PM
No, it doesn't. No human beings are different enough for such a differentiation- it doesn't really matter what the word is. While there are such groups, different to be aknowleged as seperate, "races" is too different and, as mentioned above, "breeds" lends itself to, again, something we need a new word for: evil.
#19
GraniteJJ
-
- Members
-
- 807 posts
King of Scarcity
- Location:The Great White North
- Gender:Male
Posted 24 September 2004 - 04:24 PM
Originally posted by SteveT@Sep 24 2004, 03:15 PM
Sub-species and breed both have bad connotations. They would both lead to ideas that one was inherently superior.
Alak, Korhend has quoted two different dictionaries to bring you the accepted definition of race. What more do you want?
The idea of races being different species doesn't come from biology. It comes from Science Fiction.
Alak is right though, about the definition of science and the dictionaries definition do not lend themselves to eachother.
Need I remind you of the debate we had over evolution and its connections with the words theory, law and hypothesis. A scientific theory is different than other theories, because it means something different. You made that comment. Alak is pointing out the same thing applies here, and he's right.
#20
SteveT
-
- Members
-
- 5,060 posts
100% a Dick
- Gender:Male
Posted 24 September 2004 - 05:29 PM
Yes, a lot of times words have different meanings in a scientific context. The difference is that in this case, the word doesn't. Not once have I heard in a biology class (granted, I never took it beyond high school) that race and species are synonomous. In fact, according to the dictionary, race is indeed more akin to breed from a Biology standpoint.
http://dictionary.re...m/search?q=race
http://dictionary.re...m/search?q=race
#21
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 24 September 2004 - 09:46 PM
Yep, alak could you give a source for what dictionary you're using. I can't find a single one that uses it :S
#22
Guest_Loki Tsin Dante_*
Guest_Loki Tsin Dante_*
-
- Guests
Posted 25 September 2004 - 04:02 PM
Wait, since when was the term Race synonymous with Species? for as long as I have heard the term, it has been used to refer to differing ethnicities, subspecies, or breeds of people.
The place I've ever seen Race used to refer to differing species was StarCraft and D&D, and even then the groups could interbreed(Half-Orcs, anyone?) From a biological standpoint, the difference must clearly not be that vast.
Alak, the idea of Race is a confirmed biological notion. To speak of differing races of Man is not unlike speaking of different breeds of dog: Each group possesses certain traits that distinguish it from others while leaving it free to continue interbreeding with other races.
To say that "race doesn't exist" leaves you open to a barrage of questions whose answers generally don't suggest anything other than biological difference, however slight, between people.
Why is Tay-Sachs syndrome most prevalent among Ashkenazi Jews?
Why are certain Europeans(the descendants of the Black Plague survivors most notably) immune to HIV?
Why do the West Africans and black Americans of mostly West African descent dominate sprinting, while Europeans dominate competitions of strength and East Africans(the Kenyans most notably) absolutely rule the long-distance running circuit?
Why is it that sickle-cell anemia is most prevalent among West Africans or people of West African descent?
Why do Aboriginal Australians do better, on average, than any other group of people in spatial memory tests?
Why are cystic fibrosis and hemochromatosis most common in people of European descent?
Do note that none of these actually promote some sort of actual superiority/inferiority between people. Race exists, just not in as extreme a form as people have been accustomed to denying.
The place I've ever seen Race used to refer to differing species was StarCraft and D&D, and even then the groups could interbreed(Half-Orcs, anyone?) From a biological standpoint, the difference must clearly not be that vast.
Alak, the idea of Race is a confirmed biological notion. To speak of differing races of Man is not unlike speaking of different breeds of dog: Each group possesses certain traits that distinguish it from others while leaving it free to continue interbreeding with other races.
To say that "race doesn't exist" leaves you open to a barrage of questions whose answers generally don't suggest anything other than biological difference, however slight, between people.
Why is Tay-Sachs syndrome most prevalent among Ashkenazi Jews?
Why are certain Europeans(the descendants of the Black Plague survivors most notably) immune to HIV?
Why do the West Africans and black Americans of mostly West African descent dominate sprinting, while Europeans dominate competitions of strength and East Africans(the Kenyans most notably) absolutely rule the long-distance running circuit?
Why is it that sickle-cell anemia is most prevalent among West Africans or people of West African descent?
Why do Aboriginal Australians do better, on average, than any other group of people in spatial memory tests?
Why are cystic fibrosis and hemochromatosis most common in people of European descent?
Do note that none of these actually promote some sort of actual superiority/inferiority between people. Race exists, just not in as extreme a form as people have been accustomed to denying.
#23
GraniteJJ
-
- Members
-
- 807 posts
King of Scarcity
- Location:The Great White North
- Gender:Male
Posted 25 September 2004 - 04:15 PM
EDIT: I decided to remove my post, as it was mostly incoherent babbling on account of my cold.
#24
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 25 September 2004 - 07:26 PM
I said that, while verbally sound as a seperator, the idea of "race" has no really grounding. Of course the dictioaries agree with you- that's the way it's used. The fact people say something doesn't mean it's true.Originally posted by Korhend@Sep 24 2004, 09:46 PM
Yep, alak could you give a source for what dictionary you're using. I can't find a single one that uses it :S
#25
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 25 September 2004 - 07:31 PM
Not just Linguists, Biologists. What Biology book do you have to back you up?
#26
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 25 September 2004 - 07:37 PM
I've got Carl Sagan, and a Biology textbook I no longer have...
#27
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 25 September 2004 - 07:48 PM
www.wordiq.com
In biology, some use race to mean a division within a species. Thus, in certain fields it is used as a synonym for subspecies or, in botany, variety. In the case of honeybees, for instance, it stands as a synonym for subspecies. In this usage, race serves to group members of a species that have, for a period of time, become geographically or genetically isolated from other members of that species, and as a result have diverged genetically and developed certain shared characteristics that differentiate them from the others. Although these characteristics rarely appear in all members of the group, they are more marked in or appear more frequently than in the others.
#28
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 25 September 2004 - 07:53 PM
Some also hold that the world is resting on the backs of an infinite stack of turtles. The point?some use...
#29
Korhend
-
- Members
-
- 2,213 posts
The world is a better place with Pickelhaubens!
Posted 25 September 2004 - 07:55 PM
that can be used to disprove any logic. Some believe the world is round. Because some people believe it does not in anyway disprove it. The difference between those people who believe the world rests on an infinate stack of turtles and those that believe in classification is those "some" happen to be biologists.
#30
Alakhriveion
-
- Members
-
- 4,718 posts
Anyone who tells you chemistry is an exact science is overthinki
- Location:Connecticut
Posted 25 September 2004 - 07:59 PM
You can prove the world is round, but you're ducking this. Common usage doesn't make it true.
