The issue of 'race'

Race, as defined by the common people(blacks, whites, asians, etc) is only useful in common conversation to identify a group of commonly recognized people.

The issue is that, biologically, there are no distinguishing factors between the different 'races' besides hair, eye, and skin color.

Any other biological difference is not unique to any particular 'race' and as such many biologists don't consider the term very descriptive or if it is, inapplicable to humans.

Black people aren't genetically predisposed to being dumb or to participate in criminal activity, or being more athletic than any other race.

White people aren't genetically predisposed to any of their racial stereotypes, and neither are Asians or Latinos.

Or, at the very least, there's no evidence to make such a claim about biology. Instead, these are things can be directly attributed not to biology, but to environmental factors. As such, stereotypes tend not to be true, and if they are, it's not the individual people's faults, but a factor that is environmental, and totally changeable.

Biologically, and taxonomic ally, there's no such thing as 'race' among humans. It's nothing more than a social construct that leads to bigotry and polarization of peoples. Discussions of racial differences do nothing but justify discrimination, eugenics programs, and race wars in general. It's my volition that we need to stop discussing 'race' as an issue. It's not an issue. We're all the same 'race'. The human race. Ever since the human genome project was completed...this has become the biological fact of the matter.

Sources:

-"Race as a Social Construct." Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation. 12 Aug 2011. Web. 15 Aug 2011. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28classification_of_humans%29#Races_as_socia­l_constructions)

Cho, Mildred K. "Racial and Ethnic Categories in Biomedical Research: There Is No Baby in the Bathwater." Journal of Law and Medical Ethics. 2006; 34(3): 497--479. PubMed. Web. 15 Aug 2011.
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2271137/?log$=activity)

Garte, Ph.D, Seymoure. "The Racial Genetics Paradox In Biomedical Research and Public Health." Public Health Reports. 01 Sep 2002; 117(5): 421--425. PubMed. Web. 15 Aug 2011
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1497461/pdf/12500957.pdf)

-Hoover, Edward. "There is no Scientific Rationale for Race Based Research." Edward Hoover. Journal of National Medicine Association. 01 Jun 2007; 99(6): 690--692. Pubmed. Web. 15 Aug 2011.
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2574368/?tool=pubmed)

Khan, Ph.D, Jonathan. "Genes, Race, and Population: Avoiding a Collision of Categories." American Journal of Public Health. 01 Nov 2006; 96(11): 1965--1970. Pubmed. Web. 15 Aug 2011.
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1751810/?tool=pubmed)

Lau, Lorusso. "The Justification of Race in Biological Explanation." Journal of Medical Ethics. 05 May 2011. Science Direct. Web. 15 Aug 2011.
(http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21546520)

-McElheny, Victor K. "Drawing the Map of Life: Inside the Human Genome Project." New York: Merloyd Lawrence Books. 2010. 148, 197, 222. Print.

National Human Genome Research Institute of Bethesda. "The Use of Racial, Ethnic, and Ancestral Categories in Human Genetics Research." American Journal of Human Genetics. 01 Jan 2005. 77:519--532. Science Direct. Web. 15 Aug 2011.
(http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B8JDD-4R1VW25-2-1...­43612&_user=10&_pii=S0002929707610015&_origin=search&_zone=rslt_list_item&_cover­Date=10%2F31%2F2005&_sk=999229995&wchp=dGLbVlz-zSkWB&md5=8c1246ace1df8d3649d87c0­d0e87e304&ie=/sdarticle.pdf)

-Penn State. "Skin color: Handy tool for teaching evolution?" ScienceDaily. 20 Feb. 2011. Web. 15 Aug. 2011. (http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110220091826.htm)

-Schaffner, Stephen and Pardis Sabeti. "Evolutionary Adaptation in the Human Lineage." 2008. Nature Education 1(1). Scitable. Web. 15 Aug 2011 (http://www.nature.com/scitable/topicpage/Evolutionary-Adaptation-in-the-Human-L­ineage-12397?auTags=)

As much as I absolutely hate racial-stereotypes, I can't shake of the fact that allot of them I have seen and expereinced first hand. I myself am not a stereotype at all, but indeed I have seen and witness them playing out - it annoys the hell out of me when a race fits the stereotype - even if it's a good stereotype E.g Blacks & athletics.

I may steal this for my social studies essay xD
jkjk
It's got works cited and everything
props.

>social studies

...how old are you oO?

May I add a small addendum to your discourse BigLundi?

We are a "species" not a race, races being, as you described them, a categorization system to differentiate types of individuals inside a species.

So if we have no race, then we are but a species.

But if we reason in such a way, shouldn't there be only a species of dogs, and not many breeds and races?

Races are used, sadly, by human beings to differentiate themselves from other memebers of their species on every level, when it only concerns the physical level in many precise domains, specifically skin color, average height, facial geometry etc.

But races, in my opinion, do exist. They do not "compete" on any standard when it comes to the human race, and that must be brought to light of all those woth racial prejudice. Unlike with dogs, to come bag to my example, who from race to race differentiate in such a manner that such "competition" of strenght, speed and intellect can possibly be brought about.

So if I may, I will conclude that even though we have "races" that are only meant at their basic principles to categorize the physical appearance (and beauty can not become a factor because, as they say "beaty is in the eye of that who gazes upon it"), we are one species.

Lets not forget about that when the aliens come round.

Also, good point Gizgal. Social studies was...ages ago...

Sub-classing people and putting then in a social box and expecting better when nobody cares is just wrong.
The common myth about white people is simply common without any morals when it comes to winning. That is wrong.
The common myth about black people is simply being bodily without any morals when it comes to winning. That is also wrong.

Every other sub-group classes is losers with no morals when it comes to just living. That is so wrong.
As a result , everybody is poking fun at everybody else as they create dreamful people for themselves,

I have never read a thing you wrote Lundi, but I decided to browse what you had wrote, then I saw half your post was sources. Can you tell me if any of the stuff you said is actually your own thought?

BigLundi you make a good point about that we need to stop about using 'race' as a way to differentiate between humans. The problem is that it is a long way off. Especially in the medical/pharmaceutical world. Drug companies are pushing for drugs that are supposedly good for certain 'races'. Ever since BiDil came out the FDA been swamped with drugs to be cleared for clinical trials.

Since you based your entire post on this assertion, I have to stop you there. No. Humans are not a species...we're a subspecies. We are all the lowest level you can get in taxonomy, homo sapien sapien.

Ah...
Good point.
Then please forget what I said^0^. My argument was fatally flawed to begin with.

[color=#2e1a6b]You claim that there's no biological differences between "races", but what about statistical differences? If a race statistically commits more violent offenses than other races, is false to assume that said race is more likely to commit a violent offense?

I wish there was equality in such statistics, but it's not a perfect world

@Longevity, How have you not been banned from SD?

If there's a statistical difference then there's something else involved that causes whatever happens. So if black people statistically commit crimes or whatnot, it's likely that this is due to socio economic position. It's likely this is due to things like Stereotype Threat. It's likely this is due to things we can help change, instead of, "Well they're just born that way so fuck em."

[color=#2e1a6b]Isn't this a transcendentalist position?

And what about my second question:
If a race statistically commits more violent offenses than other races, is false to assume that said race is more likely to commit a violent offense?

I'm not quite sure what 'an issue' stands for in this context (as in, does it mean 'a problem'?) but I think it would be a pity to completely deny the concept of 'race'. While the term might not be biologically correct, it's an existing social concept and not necessarily a bad one. Such things are great tools for self-identification and can bring people together as much as they pull them apart.

As long as people form schemas and other mental structures I can barely remember from my psychology lessons in high school, there will be stereotyping. Instead of emphasizing that those groups aren't really separable my means of natural science and thus don't objectively exist, it might be more meaningful to modify public opinion to see the cooperation and coexistence between the groups as well as different individuals inside the groups. Equality of 'races' doesn't have to mean that blacks can't be black (whatever that means to them), just like equality between gender doesn't have to mean women can't wear skirts and heels anymore.

Not necessarily, it's just a rejection of genetic determinism.

Denying genetic determinism doesn't render one closed off from other forms of determinism though. I'm saying it's more than just DNA that formulates who you are as a person, and each 'race' as well.

[color=#2e1a6b]If that's all this thread is, then I've got no objections. In your first post, you sounded like you were rejecting racial differences, which is why I responded

Well, I don't deny races insofar as superficial differences in skin hair and eye color.

But past that...there are no differences. Besides skin color(and even then, that's not guaranteed) there's...little to no way to tell the difference between the 'races' especially genetically.

I deny races as being...a meaningful description of what kind of person such and such is, in any way. For instance, saying "He's black" tells you nothing more than the color of his skin. It tells you nothing about his culture, his creeds, his religion, his beliefs in general...nothing.

[color=#2e1a6b]I don't like repeating myself, but I've yet to receive an answer:

If a race statistically commits more violent offenses than other races, is it false to assume that said race is more likely to commit a violent offense?

To be a subspecies of anything we first have to be a species.

What you just said is basically: "Azure is not a colour, it's just a derivative of blue."

And while I agree with you up to a certain point there are numerous genetic difference between the human 'races'. Skin, eye and hair colour are a few, anatomy and facial structure also differs to a certain point.

There is no use trying to ignore the differences in physiology among humans, this however does not justify discrimination and racism.

Behavioral patters among a certain group is most likely environmental, and not genetic.

Yes, it is false to say that.