5 ms·

It's not a White America thing to reject race as a biological concept, it's consistent with scientific study.

by redcobra762 2y ago

NoahKAndrews 2y ago
Race isn't a biological concept, but a social one, and it unfortunately has very real impacts.
- Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
  How is race not a biological concept? All the things that differentiate race are genetic. Culture and race are not synonymous.
  - svachalek 2y ago
    Biologically there is no gene that makes you "white". In recent history, Irish people weren't white.
  - strken 2y ago
    This is a bit complicated and I'm going to do a bad job of explaining it. The argument is that there are population clines, which are biological, and then those population clines are divided into races by choosing to ignore or use specific traits at a certain point along the cline. This choice isn't biological, which makes race a social construct. The underlying population clines aren't always along the same gradient. Skin colour and physical size might be gradients that run a different way across a continent; skin colour might change north to south to north again due to sun intensity, while physical size might change based on altitude and terrain. There's no disagreement that both skin colour and size are partly biological, but the decision to use one over the other to differentiate races is social.
  - a_shovel 2y ago
    All the things that differentiate race are genetic, sure, but which things are used to categorize people into race is socially constructed. Why do people base racial categories on skin color but not, say, finger length or whether you can wiggle your ears? Biology can't tell you that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
- miketery 2y ago
  It's too taboo to study. Maybe we'd be able to answer the questions if we could study it openly.
  - idontwantthis 2y ago
    WTF are you talking about? Race is studied in every discipline.
thatcat 2y ago
Science still backs a genetic component for things like happiness and IQ, which unlike race is not a social construct and yet can still effect things like social behavior and cultural adaptations to the environment.
- redcobra762 2y ago
  > In 2003, Phase 1 of the Human Genome Project (HGP) demonstrated that humans populating the earth today are on average 99.9% identical at the DNA level, there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8604262/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8604262/
  - thatcat 2y ago
    Right, there is .1 % variation in genetics which, although seems like small number, manages create differences that lead to social effects. no correlation with race required, not surprising really since race is self chosen and non specific.
    - redcobra762 2y ago
      No. You missed the rest of the statement: "there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them."
- tremon 2y ago
  That genetic component is between parents and children, not between neighbours who serendipitously share the same skin colour. happiness and IQ, which unlike race is not a social construct Which one of those is not a social construct, you'd say? Happiness -- which relies on self-reporting, or IQ -- for which a person can change their score by 10-20 points by studying test preps?
  - thatcat 2y ago
    depression is based on self reported information, is that a social construct? anyway my point is that personality predisposition has a genetic component.
Gothmog69 2y ago
No it's not. That's a woke lie. Race is definitely a biological concept. Sickle cell anemia for instance is heavily racially based.
- redcobra762 2y ago
  Which race? Black people? Nope, Indian and Arabian people get it too. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4822363/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4822363/ The "asleep" lie is that "black" means anything genetically. Every trait you want to attribute to "black people" is also found in people who wouldn't qualify as "black" culturally.
marcusverus 2y ago
That's a progressive thing. > it's consistent with scientific study Source?
- redcobra762 2y ago
  Various studies, thinking, arguments etc. That race isn't biological isn't really up for debate, scientifically. You can believe that scientific consensus is too "woke" or has a systemic bias against the idea or whatever, but the consensus is soundly at "race is not biological". I'm personally conservative in my political views, but I don't think that means I must reject scientific consensus. https://www.sapiens.org/biology/is-race-real/ https://www.sapiens.org/biology/is-race-real/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7682789/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7682789/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924977X23002493 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924977X2... https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/EP091491 https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/EP09... https://scienceandsociety.duke.edu/does-race-exist/ https://scienceandsociety.duke.edu/does-race-exist/ https://www.labxchange.org/library/items/lb:LabXchange:6fb7b7fd:html:1 https://www.labxchange.org/library/items/lb:LabXchange:6fb7b... https://www.kff.org/quick-take/race-is-a-social-category-not-a-biological-one/ https://www.kff.org/quick-take/race-is-a-social-category-not... https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/new-ama-policies-recognize-race-social-not-biological-construct https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/new-ama...
  - marcusverus 2y ago
    These are awful sources, and they clearly aren't scientific, but are expressions of opinion. Wish casting, even. They're playing the old cynical same word games that are required to hold this position: "Modern genetics has established that the biological basis of most phenotypic traits typically associated with race, such as skin color and hair texture, has demonstrated that they transcend ancestry across vast geographic distances spanning continents." The fact that the above is also true of genes that cross species lines is, presumably, not an argument that 'species' is a purely social construct with no foundation in biology. Another asserts that humans can't be divided into subspecies, ergo race doesn't exist. That is not science, it's wordplay. Populations of humans were separated for millennia with very little intermixing. These populations diverged genetically, to the degree that the descendants of one population can easily be visually distinguished from one another. These groups have fuzzy edges, but they are obviously, undeniably rooted in biological reality.
ujkhsjkdhf234 2y ago
The author is talking about social thing though. Raising ones' children which is a social and cultural. Bringing in race is completely valid.
- redcobra762 2y ago
  The point is that race is entirely made up (that's what a social construct is) and can change in an instant, so trying to lock it down by calling it a "White America" thing is wrong.

It's not a White America thing to reject race as a biological concept, it's consistent with scientific study.

NoahKAndrews 2y ago

Race isn't a biological concept, but a social one, and it unfortunately has very real impacts.

Sohcahtoa82 2y ago
How is race not a biological concept? All the things that differentiate race are genetic. Culture and race are not synonymous.
- svachalek 2y ago
  Biologically there is no gene that makes you "white". In recent history, Irish people weren't white.
- strken 2y ago
  This is a bit complicated and I'm going to do a bad job of explaining it. The argument is that there are population clines, which are biological, and then those population clines are divided into races by choosing to ignore or use specific traits at a certain point along the cline. This choice isn't biological, which makes race a social construct. The underlying population clines aren't always along the same gradient. Skin colour and physical size might be gradients that run a different way across a continent; skin colour might change north to south to north again due to sun intensity, while physical size might change based on altitude and terrain. There's no disagreement that both skin colour and size are partly biological, but the decision to use one over the other to differentiate races is social.
- a_shovel 2y ago
  All the things that differentiate race are genetic, sure, but which things are used to categorize people into race is socially constructed. Why do people base racial categories on skin color but not, say, finger length or whether you can wiggle your ears? Biology can't tell you that. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_categorization)
miketery 2y ago
It's too taboo to study. Maybe we'd be able to answer the questions if we could study it openly.
- idontwantthis 2y ago
  WTF are you talking about? Race is studied in every discipline.

thatcat 2y ago

Science still backs a genetic component for things like happiness and IQ, which unlike race is not a social construct and yet can still effect things like social behavior and cultural adaptations to the environment.

redcobra762 2y ago
> In 2003, Phase 1 of the Human Genome Project (HGP) demonstrated that humans populating the earth today are on average 99.9% identical at the DNA level, there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8604262/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8604262/
- thatcat 2y ago
  Right, there is .1 % variation in genetics which, although seems like small number, manages create differences that lead to social effects. no correlation with race required, not surprising really since race is self chosen and non specific.
  - redcobra762 2y ago
    No. You missed the rest of the statement: "there is no genetic basis for race, and there is more genetic variation within a race than between them."
tremon 2y ago
That genetic component is between parents and children, not between neighbours who serendipitously share the same skin colour. happiness and IQ, which unlike race is not a social construct Which one of those is not a social construct, you'd say? Happiness -- which relies on self-reporting, or IQ -- for which a person can change their score by 10-20 points by studying test preps?
- thatcat 2y ago
  depression is based on self reported information, is that a social construct? anyway my point is that personality predisposition has a genetic component.

Gothmog69 2y ago

No it's not. That's a woke lie. Race is definitely a biological concept. Sickle cell anemia for instance is heavily racially based.

redcobra762 2y ago
Which race? Black people? Nope, Indian and Arabian people get it too. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4822363/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4822363/ The "asleep" lie is that "black" means anything genetically. Every trait you want to attribute to "black people" is also found in people who wouldn't qualify as "black" culturally.

marcusverus 2y ago

That's a progressive thing. > it's consistent with scientific study Source?

redcobra762 2y ago
Various studies, thinking, arguments etc. That race isn't biological isn't really up for debate, scientifically. You can believe that scientific consensus is too "woke" or has a systemic bias against the idea or whatever, but the consensus is soundly at "race is not biological". I'm personally conservative in my political views, but I don't think that means I must reject scientific consensus. https://www.sapiens.org/biology/is-race-real/ https://www.sapiens.org/biology/is-race-real/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-construct-scientists-argue/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/race-is-a-social-... https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7682789/ https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7682789/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924977X23002493 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924977X2... https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/EP091491 https://physoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1113/EP09... https://scienceandsociety.duke.edu/does-race-exist/ https://scienceandsociety.duke.edu/does-race-exist/ https://www.labxchange.org/library/items/lb:LabXchange:6fb7b7fd:html:1 https://www.labxchange.org/library/items/lb:LabXchange:6fb7b... https://www.kff.org/quick-take/race-is-a-social-category-not-a-biological-one/ https://www.kff.org/quick-take/race-is-a-social-category-not... https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/new-ama-policies-recognize-race-social-not-biological-construct https://www.ama-assn.org/press-center/press-releases/new-ama...
- marcusverus 2y ago
  These are awful sources, and they clearly aren't scientific, but are expressions of opinion. Wish casting, even. They're playing the old cynical same word games that are required to hold this position: "Modern genetics has established that the biological basis of most phenotypic traits typically associated with race, such as skin color and hair texture, has demonstrated that they transcend ancestry across vast geographic distances spanning continents." The fact that the above is also true of genes that cross species lines is, presumably, not an argument that 'species' is a purely social construct with no foundation in biology. Another asserts that humans can't be divided into subspecies, ergo race doesn't exist. That is not science, it's wordplay. Populations of humans were separated for millennia with very little intermixing. These populations diverged genetically, to the degree that the descendants of one population can easily be visually distinguished from one another. These groups have fuzzy edges, but they are obviously, undeniably rooted in biological reality.

ujkhsjkdhf234 2y ago

The author is talking about social thing though. Raising ones' children which is a social and cultural. Bringing in race is completely valid.

redcobra762 2y ago
The point is that race is entirely made up (that's what a social construct is) and can change in an instant, so trying to lock it down by calling it a "White America" thing is wrong.