Definition of a Race - An argument between friends

[notsosavagemessiah]

I believe we are all one race. Human. Sure there are hereditary differences, but we're still the same species. You wouldn't call two different kinds of dog anything but that right? Even though you give them different names to point out differences, they're still the same animal right? You wouldn't say that a german shepard and a poodle are different races of dog, just a different variation of the same basic animal. What makes humans any different? We are all human, whether we're black, white, asian or hispanic. So the question then becomes, what makes us human?

 

[Sark]

I believe we are all one race. Human. Sure there are hereditary differences, but we're still the same species. You wouldn't call two different kinds of dog anything but that right? Even though you give them different names to point out differences, they're still the same animal right? You wouldn't say that a german shepard and a poodle are different races of dog, just a different variation of the same basic animal. What makes humans any different? We are all human, whether we're black, white, asian or hispanic. So the question then becomes, what makes us human?

Actually we are a species. Races do exist. Genetic characteristics such as lactose intolerance show this fairly well. Around 70% of Asian people are lactose intolerant whilst less than 10% of white people. Surely this shows that there is some racial traits that extend beyond appearance.
As for dogs, they are all under the species of canine, but have individual races or breeds. These are not exclusive as dogs can crossbreed between races. Similar to humans.

The current human pedigree's are:
Caucasoid race
Negroid race
Capoid race
Mongoloid race
Australoid race

 

[notsosavagemessiah]

I believe we are all one race. Human. Sure there are hereditary differences, but we're still the same species. You wouldn't call two different kinds of dog anything but that right? Even though you give them different names to point out differences, they're still the same animal right? You wouldn't say that a german shepard and a poodle are different races of dog, just a different variation of the same basic animal. What makes humans any different? We are all human, whether we're black, white, asian or hispanic. So the question then becomes, what makes us human?

Actually we are a species. Races do exist. Genetic characteristics such as lactose intolerance show this fairly well. Around 70% of Asian people are lactose intolerant whilst less than 10% of white people. Surely this shows that there is some racial traits that extend beyond appearance.
As for dogs, they are all under the species of canine, but have individual races or breeds. These are not exclusive as dogs can crossbreed between races. Similar to humans.

The current human pedigree's are:
Caucasoid race
Negroid race
Capoid race
Mongoloid race

But, they're still dogs, and we're still humans. Again, just because there are different types, doesn't change the fact that we're still part of the same genetic pool. No, we cannot ignore the differences, but we cannot also not ignore that we have the same basic characteristics, which is why we can breed with one another because we are simply not all that dissimliar. We may have slight differences, but again, that doesn't change what we are. The word race is, in my opinion, is a designator to refer to a different species. People are not a different species because they live in different areas and therefore have adapted genetic differences. Simply put, the word race should not be applied to a subset of characteristics.

 

[DrunkWithPower]

There is no race, only ethnicity.

 

[Acaroid]

What I find annoying is when people claim anti-muslim remarks are racists... even worse when the media says it... man they are stupid.

Oh even more annoying when they tried to teach me in school that "reverse racisim" is ok, I came close to being expelled and teachers claiming I was racisist because I kicked up a stink about it... but it is ok I won in the end and got a formal written appology from not only my teacher but from the principle aswell.

anyway a point,
Genetically there are clear differences in races, but the study of it is always looked down by people and doesnt get much coverage (was reading about it in a medical journal), im sure with some research you might be able to find the clear deffinitions of races?

 

[Sark]

I believe we are all one race. Human. Sure there are hereditary differences, but we're still the same species. You wouldn't call two different kinds of dog anything but that right? Even though you give them different names to point out differences, they're still the same animal right? You wouldn't say that a german shepard and a poodle are different races of dog, just a different variation of the same basic animal. What makes humans any different? We are all human, whether we're black, white, asian or hispanic. So the question then becomes, what makes us human?

Actually we are a species. Races do exist. Genetic characteristics such as lactose intolerance show this fairly well. Around 70% of Asian people are lactose intolerant whilst less than 10% of white people. Surely this shows that there is some racial traits that extend beyond appearance.
As for dogs, they are all under the species of canine, but have individual races or breeds. These are not exclusive as dogs can crossbreed between races. Similar to humans.

The current human pedigree's are:
Caucasoid race
Negroid race
Capoid race
Mongoloid race

But, they're still dogs, and we're still humans. Again, just because there are different types, doesn't change the fact that we're still part of the same genetic pool. No, we cannot ignore the differences, but we cannot also not ignore that we have the same basic characteristics, which is why we can breed with one another because we are simply not all that dissimliar. We may have slight differences, but again, that doesn't change what we are. The word race is, in my opinion, is a designator to refer to a different species. People are not a different species because they live in different areas and therefore have adapted genetic differences. Simply put, the word race should not be applied to a subset of characteristics.

Sure we are all 99% genetically identical, but that's irrelevant. Race is best used only to describe physical characteristics. These are determined by the area which they evolved; i.e. darker skin in hotter/dryer climates. The physical differences are there for a reason, or they wouldn't have happened. Also, your opinion is wrong.

 

[Yamiki]

IMO which isnt a expert one or even very important, we all bleed the same causcasian, african-american (negro??), hispanic, or asian on the inside we are the same mess of blood, guts, bones and muscles.
You may not eat cow because it is sacred to you.. good for you... I personally don't and won't judge for that, because when it comes down to the basic make up of a person ... we all have bones, we have hearts, we have lungs ... get the picture.. the colour of your skin won't make me judge you, you should be judged on your actions and how you treat others...
/ridculous rant

 

[Wadders]

People say that we're all the same, that we are all part of the Human Race, but I really don't agree.

were not all the same. Massively differing cultures and ethnic backgrounds can be found across the world. Don't tell me that Australian Aborigines are the same as say, People of Nordic descent. They look different, they speak different, they do things differently and they have different cultures. Sure they are the same species, but they couldn't be much more different culturally and ethnically. It's stupid to just say "hey man, were all the same really ya know?" and ignore these important differences.

So I would say that race is defined by culture, location, language and ethnicity. If a group of people have all these factors in common, they are a race.

Haha but surely you've heard of the Aboriginal Nords? They roamed the of Antartica, often lost to sight between snow drifts! All nonsense aside, though, that's a better point than most anything I've ever heard on the topic. Sure, you might break it down and try to claim that there are three, Caucasoid, Mongolid, and Negroid, but between and among those they are far too different to even allow that a wobbly stance on the matter.

well races exist for a reason black people are black because they live in Africa (not only africa now apparently because of all you silly americans)and it is a place were it's very hot and their skin is to protect them from the sun that's why only whiteys get tan.

Gods, I do hope you were being sarcastic, because I laughed for a few minutes at how ridiculous that statement is. Heh, because it's hot their skin is dark...ahh, that was refreshing, thank you for the free amusement.

Thanks, I do my best I just don't like it when people over simplify things like that.

And yeah, I'm not too sure what that chap is on about really. There may be some sense in there somewhere, but it's buried under heaps of confusion...
And someone should tell him that it wasn't only Americans who were in the slave trade.

 

[notsosavagemessiah]

I believe we are all one race. Human. Sure there are hereditary differences, but we're still the same species. You wouldn't call two different kinds of dog anything but that right? Even though you give them different names to point out differences, they're still the same animal right? You wouldn't say that a german shepard and a poodle are different races of dog, just a different variation of the same basic animal. What makes humans any different? We are all human, whether we're black, white, asian or hispanic. So the question then becomes, what makes us human?

Actually we are a species. Races do exist. Genetic characteristics such as lactose intolerance show this fairly well. Around 70% of Asian people are lactose intolerant whilst less than 10% of white people. Surely this shows that there is some racial traits that extend beyond appearance.
As for dogs, they are all under the species of canine, but have individual races or breeds. These are not exclusive as dogs can crossbreed between races. Similar to humans.

The current human pedigree's are:
Caucasoid race
Negroid race
Capoid race
Mongoloid race

But, they're still dogs, and we're still humans. Again, just because there are different types, doesn't change the fact that we're still part of the same genetic pool. No, we cannot ignore the differences, but we cannot also not ignore that we have the same basic characteristics, which is why we can breed with one another because we are simply not all that dissimliar. We may have slight differences, but again, that doesn't change what we are. The word race is, in my opinion, is a designator to refer to a different species. People are not a different species because they live in different areas and therefore have adapted genetic differences. Simply put, the word race should not be applied to a subset of characteristics.

Sure we are all 99% genetically identical, but that's irrelevant. Race is best used only to describe physical characteristics. These are determined by the area which they evolved; i.e. darker skin in hotter/dryer climates. The physical differences are there for a reason, or they wouldn't have happened. Also, your opinion is wrong.

Ok, but how does that seperate you from being human? Our Genetics are what make up our physical characteristics, adaptation is a response from our genes to where we live, therefore, all that has happened is that our human bodies have created different characteristics so as to survive more easily in our given enviroments. It changes things superficially, but not enough to seperate us at the base level.

 

[Lullabye]

why are we arguing over the definition of a word?
"Race"
it means whatever teh dictionary says it does. get it right folks, your all talking about different things, but using the same word(sound used to label the idea) to describe it.

 

[Jandau]

As far as I'm concerned, and speaking bilogically here, race is a group whose members are capable of producing fertile offspring. Humans are a single race because any variety can mix with any other. The "fertile" part is noted because some animal species can produce offspring that isn't fertile and is basically a dead end (Horse + Donkey = Mule).

Sociologically, Race is an outdated concept that should be done away with as soon as possible.

 

[Thurmer]

Sociologically, Race is an outdated concept that should be done away with as soon as possible.

not that i disagree with the theory of your statement, race also has a fairly uselful practical side eg. what race was the man who stole your handbag? (your not a racist if you jumped to what i did.. i blame the media)

 

[Jandau]

Sociologically, Race is an outdated concept that should be done away with as soon as possible.

not that i disagree with the theory of your statement, race also has a fairly uselful practical side eg. what race was the man who stole your handbag? (your not a racist if you jumped to what i did.. i blame the media)

How about: "What color was the robber's skin?" in the same way you ask "What color was his hair?" or "What color were his eyes?".

 

[Agema]

As far as I'm concerned, and speaking bilogically here, race is a group whose members are capable of producing fertile offspring. Humans are a single race because any variety can mix with any other. The "fertile" part is noted because some animal species can produce offspring that isn't fertile and is basically a dead end (Horse + Donkey = Mule).

Sociologically, Race is an outdated concept that should be done away with as soon as possible.

Not quite: if you're talking about capability of producing fertile offspring, the taxonomic level in biology is species. A race is a subset of species, where the individuals within that race inbreed whilst still technically being capable of breeding with other races in the same species. (The races don't interbreed because of reasons like being geographically distant, or a plant with a selective pollinating insect).

 

[Jandau]

Not quite: if you're talking about capability of producing fertile offspring, the taxonomic level in biology is species. A race is a subset of species, where the individuals within that race inbreed whilst still technically being capable of breeding with other races in the same species. (The races don't interbreed because of reasons like being geographically distant, or a plant with a selective pollinating insect).

Indeed you are correct and I made a slight mistake. Thank you for correcting it.

 

[Krantos]

Ask a geneticist. By scientific definition, Race is exactly what someone above said, a sub-species. Any geneticist will tell you that there is no genetic basis for the societal notion of race. There is, in fact, more genetic diversity within each of the "races" than there is between them.

What we think of when we think of race is nothing more than a social construct. For example, how do you describe an African-American? What about a person who is half Caucasian? Are they white or black?

Years ago, a person was considered African American if they were at least 1/8 black. The Black genes were considered to have "tainted" the rest. Horrible notion, right? Ever consider why we consider Obama to be Black? His Mother was white, but he's considered African American, not Caucasian. He was even raised by his mother as his parents divorced when he was 2, but he is still considered African American. There is no basis for referring to him as such. He is just as much Caucasian as African American, and was even raised by his Caucasian Mother. But society considers him to be Black.

Social construct. There doesn't need to be a rhyme or reason for it. It's ingrained into society's consciousness, and it won't change but gradually.

And Skin pigmentation doesn't quite work either, because I've known some "Blacks" who were lighter complected than some "whites" I've known.

 

[BehattedWanderer]

sorry i was drunk and you are apperantly a jerk

Yes, yes I am. Doesn't negate the fact that your post made about as much sense as a hydrophobic flower. Oh, and a dismissal doesn't lend any to your thought.

Thanks, I do my best I just don't like it when people over simplify things like that.

And yeah, I'm not too sure what that chap is on about really. There may be some sense in there somewhere, but it's buried under heaps of confusion...
And someone should tell him that it wasn't only Americans who were in the slave trade.

I always love hearing that kind of argument, that Americans were the ones in the biggest slave trade. The Chinese imprisoned everyone under their sun, the Roman and Greeks used to use the men captured from the germanic and egyptian lands as well as their own damn poor as slaves, The Russians used to enslave only their own people and just accost everyone else, and let us not forget that if it wasn't for the Brits, none of the Americas would have had slaves. Although, after a bit of bored info digging, apparently Australians and Europeans are considered s different group, since there's been too much cultural distance and ethnic diversity for them to still be the same. And I was wrong above, there are apparently five groups of human; Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, Capoid, and Astraloid. So hats off to you for making such an interesting point that I went out and looked up why that is. I tip my hat to you, sir.

 

[Wadders]

I always love hearing that kind of argument, that Americans were the ones in the biggest slave trade. The Chinese imprisoned everyone under their sun, the Roman and Greeks used to use the men captured from the germanic and egyptian lands as well as their own damn poor as slaves, The Russians used to enslave only their own people and just accost everyone else, and let us not forget that if it wasn't for the Brits, none of the Americas would have had slaves. Although, after a bit of bored info digging, apparently Australians and Europeans are considered s different group, since there's been too much cultural distance and ethnic diversity for them to still be the same. And I was wrong above, there are apparently
five groups of human; Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid, Capoid, and Astraloid. So hats off to you for making such an interesting point that I went out and looked up why that is. I tip my hat to you, sir.

Exactly, pretty much everyone has stuck their fingers in the slavery pie. A holier than thou attitude really doesn't work with regards to slavery, and most historical issues really. No country has a clean record. (Not to say that slavery is history though, it still goes on today regrettably)

And I see, interesting stuff. What defines Capoid and Astraloid? I'm guessing the 2nd one has something to do with Australia?

Edit: on a less mature note; 800th post! w00t!