5 ms·

Are you trying to say the place of birth somehow decides what capabilities you are born with as a human being? Are you saying people born in third world countri

by ddnb 8y ago

Are you trying to say the place of birth somehow decides what capabilities you are born with as a human being? Are you saying people born in third world countries are different than people born in first world countries? Because that seems to me to be absolutely ridiculous.

Rjevski 8y ago
The people, no. The cultures? I believe so. If you're taught your entire life that X is completely acceptable, and you arrive as an immigrant and don't want to adapt your beliefs/values to your new country's then it is a problem. Replace X with anything that you would find inappropriate in your current country - forced marriages, India's caste system, etc and I think you'll see what I mean.
BigJono 8y ago
I didn't get that from his comment at all. Sounds like you're conjuring up a straw man here. 30,000 babies and 30,000 adults with a lifetime of experiences are two very different things. It's perfectly possible to believe that immigrants from heavily-Muslim countries cannot realistically integrate with first world societies without believing racist rubbish like genetic inferiority.
- foldr 8y ago
  >It's perfectly possible to believe that immigrants from heavily-Muslim countries cannot realistically integrate with first world societies without believing racist rubbish like genetic inferiority. I don't see how it would be possible to believe this at all, given the abundant examples to the contrary.
  - supreme_sublime 8y ago
    Unfortunately there might be an argument for some form of genetic inferiority. Considering how many first cousin marriages there are in certain Muslim communities. [0] >Although British parents of Pakistani origin account for 3.4 per cent of all births nationwide, they also account for around 30 per cent of children born with recessive gene disorders. I'm not really a fan of government force, and don't really care who other people marry, but this is obviously a problem. The risks associated with inbreeding (especially over many generations) are pretty well known. [0] - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warning-over-births-to-first-cousin-marriages.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warn...
  - foldr 8y ago
    Just a note to add to the racist sibling comment. The stuff about cousin marriage is hysteria from people who don't understand the probability calculus. It's possible for P(child_of_cousin_marriage|abnormality) to be quite high without P(abnormality|child_of_cousin_marriage) being much greater than P(abnormality) -- as in fact it isn't.
    - supreme_sublime 8y ago
      I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it. So I don't understand your notation, if you could explain in a bit more layman terms it would be great. As I understand it, the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. I'm not sure if this would compound over generations though, it seems like it would. I don't really think that my comment was "racist". Just talking about how culture affects genes and vice versa. Was it not bad that the old European nobles were inbred as well?
      - foldr 8y ago
        >I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it Probability calculus, not calculus in the sense of integration and differentiation. >So I don't understand your notation P(x) is the background probability of x. P(x|y) is the probability of x given y. >I'm not sure if this would compound over generations It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. >the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. Indeed, which shows how silly your theory is. I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? That's such utter nonsense that you shouldn't be surprised if people infer some kind of malicious intent behind your comment.
        supreme_sublime 8y ago
        >It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. I'm not sure what you mean, most westerners don't make a habit of marrying their cousins. Because of this compounding it means that the risks would be much higher than 3-4%, which is what we see in the data. >I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? It seems as though birth defects aren't the only way that inbreeding negatively affects offspring. It also appears to lower intelligence[0], while also increasing mental health issues. [0] - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128
brailsafe 8y ago
It depends. How pedantic do you want to get?
adsfqwop 8y ago
In the case where place of birth dictates culture and customs, then yes in that sense there is a difference. Culture is a very difficult thing to change. What we get is culture clash, where people are essentially born with different values, customs, and ways to behave in society. There is very good internet lore, which sort of describes this phenomenon called "The Eternal September": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September What Europe is experiencing right now, is essentially the same as what the internet experienced during Eternal September; the ability and capacity to assimilate has been exceeded, and therefore yes, there is a very real possibility of destruction of the western culture and values. As for stopping the bombing and destruction of these countries, you simply cannot argue with that proposition. It's actually quite perplexing that politicians are putting so little effort into solving the root cause, instead preferring the virtue signalling easy route, without seemingly any thought to the actual cultural and societal consequences of their actions.
- ddnb 8y ago
  > Where people are essentially born with different values, customs, and ways to behave in society. When I went to school there was a pretty high number of second generation muslim immigrants, but even there you already saw their strict values eroding. Where their parents were mostly strictly religious, most kids (not all) went partying and drinking, didn't care about wearing veils. A girl from back then, became my neighbour last year and she couldn't care less about religion anymore, they have decent jobs and live life like everyone else here. I'm certain not every immigrant or their kids will adjust as fast, but it's a matter of time, if not this generation, the next. What 'strict' values will my neighbours kid still have from their 'home' country? They won't even be brought up with their religion anymore. > the ability and capacity to assimilate has been exceeded Has it? Can this be quantified in some way? Just like my anecdote, is this a personal feeling? As I don't feel that way at all.
  - supreme_sublime 8y ago
    >When I went to school there was a pretty high number of second generation muslim immigrants, but even there you already saw their strict values eroding. I certainly wouldn't take that happening as a given. If you bend over backwards to attempt to accommodate their culture in the west, you aren't giving any incentive to join your culture and worldview. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1540895/Young-British-Muslims-getting-more-radical.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1540895/Young-Britis...

by ddnb 8y ago

Rjevski 8y ago

The people, no. The cultures? I believe so. If you're taught your entire life that X is completely acceptable, and you arrive as an immigrant and don't want to adapt your beliefs/values to your new country's then it is a problem. Replace X with anything that you would find inappropriate in your current country - forced marriages, India's caste system, etc and I think you'll see what I mean.

BigJono 8y ago

I didn't get that from his comment at all. Sounds like you're conjuring up a straw man here. 30,000 babies and 30,000 adults with a lifetime of experiences are two very different things. It's perfectly possible to believe that immigrants from heavily-Muslim countries cannot realistically integrate with first world societies without believing racist rubbish like genetic inferiority.

foldr 8y ago
>It's perfectly possible to believe that immigrants from heavily-Muslim countries cannot realistically integrate with first world societies without believing racist rubbish like genetic inferiority. I don't see how it would be possible to believe this at all, given the abundant examples to the contrary.
- supreme_sublime 8y ago
  Unfortunately there might be an argument for some form of genetic inferiority. Considering how many first cousin marriages there are in certain Muslim communities. [0] >Although British parents of Pakistani origin account for 3.4 per cent of all births nationwide, they also account for around 30 per cent of children born with recessive gene disorders. I'm not really a fan of government force, and don't really care who other people marry, but this is obviously a problem. The risks associated with inbreeding (especially over many generations) are pretty well known. [0] - https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warning-over-births-to-first-cousin-marriages.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/4014743/Warn...
- foldr 8y ago
  Just a note to add to the racist sibling comment. The stuff about cousin marriage is hysteria from people who don't understand the probability calculus. It's possible for P(child_of_cousin_marriage|abnormality) to be quite high without P(abnormality|child_of_cousin_marriage) being much greater than P(abnormality) -- as in fact it isn't.
  - supreme_sublime 8y ago
    I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it. So I don't understand your notation, if you could explain in a bit more layman terms it would be great. As I understand it, the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. I'm not sure if this would compound over generations though, it seems like it would. I don't really think that my comment was "racist". Just talking about how culture affects genes and vice versa. Was it not bad that the old European nobles were inbred as well?
    - foldr 8y ago
      >I did take calculus in high school, but I barely remember it Probability calculus, not calculus in the sense of integration and differentiation. >So I don't understand your notation P(x) is the background probability of x. P(x|y) is the probability of x given y. >I'm not sure if this would compound over generations It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. >the chance for birth defects goes from around 1% to 3-4%, about the same as a woman in her late 30s/early 40s having a child. Indeed, which shows how silly your theory is. I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? That's such utter nonsense that you shouldn't be surprised if people infer some kind of malicious intent behind your comment.
      - supreme_sublime 8y ago
        >It's already had plenty of time to compound over generations, to whatever extent it does. I'm not sure what you mean, most westerners don't make a habit of marrying their cousins. Because of this compounding it means that the risks would be much higher than 3-4%, which is what we see in the data. >I mean, are you really suggesting that a slightly higher incidence of e.g. cystic fibrosis in Pakistani communities somehow makes it more difficult for them to integrate? It seems as though birth defects aren't the only way that inbreeding negatively affects offspring. It also appears to lower intelligence[0], while also increasing mental health issues. [0] - https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2FBF01068128

brailsafe 8y ago

It depends. How pedantic do you want to get?

adsfqwop 8y ago

In the case where place of birth dictates culture and customs, then yes in that sense there is a difference. Culture is a very difficult thing to change. What we get is culture clash, where people are essentially born with different values, customs, and ways to behave in society. There is very good internet lore, which sort of describes this phenomenon called "The Eternal September": https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September What Europe is experiencing right now, is essentially the same as what the internet experienced during Eternal September; the ability and capacity to assimilate has been exceeded, and therefore yes, there is a very real possibility of destruction of the western culture and values. As for stopping the bombing and destruction of these countries, you simply cannot argue with that proposition. It's actually quite perplexing that politicians are putting so little effort into solving the root cause, instead preferring the virtue signalling easy route, without seemingly any thought to the actual cultural and societal consequences of their actions.

ddnb 8y ago
> Where people are essentially born with different values, customs, and ways to behave in society. When I went to school there was a pretty high number of second generation muslim immigrants, but even there you already saw their strict values eroding. Where their parents were mostly strictly religious, most kids (not all) went partying and drinking, didn't care about wearing veils. A girl from back then, became my neighbour last year and she couldn't care less about religion anymore, they have decent jobs and live life like everyone else here. I'm certain not every immigrant or their kids will adjust as fast, but it's a matter of time, if not this generation, the next. What 'strict' values will my neighbours kid still have from their 'home' country? They won't even be brought up with their religion anymore. > the ability and capacity to assimilate has been exceeded Has it? Can this be quantified in some way? Just like my anecdote, is this a personal feeling? As I don't feel that way at all.
- supreme_sublime 8y ago
  >When I went to school there was a pretty high number of second generation muslim immigrants, but even there you already saw their strict values eroding. I certainly wouldn't take that happening as a given. If you bend over backwards to attempt to accommodate their culture in the west, you aren't giving any incentive to join your culture and worldview. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1540895/Young-British-Muslims-getting-more-radical.html https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1540895/Young-Britis...