3 ms·

That doesn't refute the parent's point. There is more to race than some jackass using it as a means to discriminate. It is not just a "social construct".

by 67726e 11y ago

personjerry 11y ago
I thought I effectively showed a "basis in science" (genetics), directly refuting the claim in the parent.
- gozur88 11y ago
  So your idea is genetics are a social construct?
  - personjerry 11y ago
    I'm saying race is based on historical and social circumstances. This notion is further supported because races are scientifically (genetically) difficult to distinguish. Hence "race is a social construct" is in fact based in science, directly arguing against the parent comment.
    - Pilfer 11y ago
      >race is a social construct is based in science This is especially silly and misleading. Race is considered a "social construct" under the theory of Social Constructionism. For people who don't subscribe to the theory of Social constructionism, race is not a "social construct". Social constructionism itself is not based on biological and evolutionary fact. It is a philosophical approach to the world that conveniently disregards biology, genetics, behavioral ecology, and enormous scale (n=millions) of statistical studies. When you remove Social Constructionism from your thesis, your entire argument falls apart. Most people do not believe in discredited theories like social constructionism. The other posters in this thread are asking you to rework your argument without appeals to Social Constructionism, and you show you are unable to do so.
    - gozur88 11y ago
      >I'm saying race is based on historical and social circumstances. This is patently untrue, though.
    - force_reboot 11y ago
      Races are not difficult to distinguish, in fact determining self-identified race from genetic data is trivial, and genetic data is clustered in ways that reflect the common usage of racial categories. For example see http://www.gettinggeneticsdone.com/2011/10/new-dimension-to-principal-components_27.html http://www.gettinggeneticsdone.com/2011/10/new-dimension-to-...
hansen 11y ago
I’m just skimming over the wikipedia article [1]. Could you please clarify about what definition of race we are talking here? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28biology%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28biology%29

That doesn't refute the parent's point. There is more to race than some jackass using it as a means to discriminate. It is not just a "social construct".

by 67726e 11y ago

That doesn't refute the parent's point. There is more to race than some jackass using it as a means to discriminate. It is not just a "social construct".

personjerry 11y ago

I thought I effectively showed a "basis in science" (genetics), directly refuting the claim in the parent.

gozur88 11y ago
So your idea is genetics are a social construct?
- personjerry 11y ago
  I'm saying race is based on historical and social circumstances. This notion is further supported because races are scientifically (genetically) difficult to distinguish. Hence "race is a social construct" is in fact based in science, directly arguing against the parent comment.
  - Pilfer 11y ago
    >race is a social construct is based in science This is especially silly and misleading. Race is considered a "social construct" under the theory of Social Constructionism. For people who don't subscribe to the theory of Social constructionism, race is not a "social construct". Social constructionism itself is not based on biological and evolutionary fact. It is a philosophical approach to the world that conveniently disregards biology, genetics, behavioral ecology, and enormous scale (n=millions) of statistical studies. When you remove Social Constructionism from your thesis, your entire argument falls apart. Most people do not believe in discredited theories like social constructionism. The other posters in this thread are asking you to rework your argument without appeals to Social Constructionism, and you show you are unable to do so.
  - gozur88 11y ago
    >I'm saying race is based on historical and social circumstances. This is patently untrue, though.
  - force_reboot 11y ago
    Races are not difficult to distinguish, in fact determining self-identified race from genetic data is trivial, and genetic data is clustered in ways that reflect the common usage of racial categories. For example see http://www.gettinggeneticsdone.com/2011/10/new-dimension-to-principal-components_27.html http://www.gettinggeneticsdone.com/2011/10/new-dimension-to-...

hansen 11y ago

I’m just skimming over the wikipedia article [1]. Could you please clarify about what definition of race we are talking here? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28biology%29 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28biology%29