It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Racism, Sexism, Science, and Evolution

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 06:12 PM
link   
Here's the problem.

Evolution would predict that certain races would emerge with traits that provide a competitive advantage.

Political-correctness tells us that it is wrong to think this way -that all races should be considered equal, and that any generalizations or stereotypes are bad form.

There seems to be obvious differences between the genders, but it's "wrong" to point them out.

What's the honest answer? Could the differences be scientifically quantified?

Would it be more in line with denying ignorance to admit there are general differences among races and genders?

Or is it just one of those things where it's more pragmatic to pretend every body is the same?

If that's the case, is it a conspiracy to dehumanize all of us, making it out like we're all no different and all replaceable, like worker bees in a hive?




posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 06:25 PM
link   
IMO, When it comes down to it we are all human.
There might be slight differences but we are all one in the same.

This sounds like something a racist would say...
edit on 17-6-2012 by GmoS719 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by UltimateSkeptic1


There seems to be obvious differences between the genders, but it's "wrong" to point them out.



Present your evidence.



Or is it just one of those things where it's more pragmatic to pretend every body is the same?


Legally, yes.


If that's the case, is it a conspiracy to dehumanize all of us, making it out like we're all no different and all replaceable, like worker bees in a hive?


Well, I'd say this-First, you must present evidence of our differences. Next, you need to show why this affects our society and lastly you need to explain why people should not be seen as equal in the eyes of the law.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:12 PM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


Gender differences are self-evident. Women have children, men don't. The entire biology of men and women is different.

Racial differences are also self-evident. There are few blue-eyed Asians. Africans have darker skin than Scandinavians.

The science of evolution would suggest there must be racial differences that evolved to create an evolutionary advantage.

I never said anything about the law. I'm bringing up the point that by definition races must be different, or else we couldn't tell them apart, right? And yet political-correctness tells us that we must not acknowledge racial or gender differences.

There is an inherent conflict between the science and being PC.

I'm not suggesting this has anything to do with laws. I'm saying that the science of evolution contradicts the idea that races would all be the same.

Do you disagree?



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by UltimateSkeptic1
reply to post by antonia
 



I never said anything about the law. I'm bringing up the point that by definition races must be different, or else we couldn't tell them apart, right? And yet political-correctness tells us that we must not acknowledge racial or gender differences.



Um no, there is no legal compulsion for you to pretend there is no physical difference between the races. There isn't even a social taboo against this. There is however a social taboo regarding intellectual differences. This is what you are attempting to allude to. You can voice your opinion all day about this in the U.S., it is not illegal. So what is your real point? The only way this matters if you do something legally about it. Otherwise we are just having a pointless conversation.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   

I never said anything about the law. I'm bringing up the point that by definition races must be different, or else we couldn't tell them apart, right? And yet political-correctness tells us that we must not acknowledge racial or gender differences.


Uh, that's not true at all. I'm not sure what reality you live in. We have separate bathrooms for sexes and black history month, yet "we must not acknowledge" the differences?



Racial differences are also self-evident. There are few blue-eyed Asians. Africans have darker skin than Scandinavians.


Race is largely a social construct. Skin and eye color mean nothing. Unless you consider black albinos as white.




edit on 17-6-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by antonia

Originally posted by UltimateSkeptic1
reply to post by antonia
 



I never said anything about the law. I'm bringing up the point that by definition races must be different, or else we couldn't tell them apart, right? And yet political-correctness tells us that we must not acknowledge racial or gender differences.



Um no, there is no legal compulsion for you to pretend there is no physical difference between the races. There isn't even a social taboo against this. There is however a social taboo regarding intellectual differences. This is what you are attempting to allude to. You can voice your opinion all day about this in the U.S., it is not illegal. So what is your real point? The only way this matters if you do something legally about it. Otherwise we are just having a pointless conversation.


I just made this observation because I spent the weekend with "intellectuals" who on one hand follow the religion of evolution, and on the other hand swear that all races are equal.

Just thought it was sort of an interesting logical contradiction.

I think making people aware of logical contradictions does have a point if it helps people reflect on their own beliefs rather than just assume everything they think must be true because they thought it.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by UltimateSkeptic1


I just made this observation because I spent the weekend with "intellectuals" who on one hand follow the religion of evolution, and on the other hand swear that all races are equal.

Just thought it was sort of an interesting logical contradiction.
.


It is assumed the races are "intellectually" equal, not physically.



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:19 PM
link   
The inherent differences lay within the body.

For example, a forensic pathologist can tell the race of a person from looking at a skeleton. That is a biological factor, not a social factor.

Brain cavity sizes are different in volume between the races.

The center of gravity is different in the races ( blogs.alternet.org... -in-swimming-and-running/ )~an article, more can be found with google. That would be a biological construct not a social construct.

Fast twitch and Slow twitch muscle fibers differ in numbers between races. Again, biological and not social.

They also say that there is a %1 difference in genders. We know how big the differences there are. There is also a %1 difference between the races.

So yes, race IS a biological construct. Our intellectualism is a social construct, so to speak.

Food for thought.
edit on 17-6-2012 by kimish because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2012 @ 10:23 PM
link   
What sort of "competitive advantages" are you referring to?

I'm not baiting, simply asking a question.

I personally believe that the biggest advantages/disadvantages placed on races/sexes are placed by society, not evolution.



posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 08:46 AM
link   
This is where the theory of evolution and political correctness clash.

Political correctness and the majority of society tells us that racism is wrong (which I agree with)

Science tells us that there are physical differences between various races of humans.



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join