I really, really, really think this needs to be spelled out in a non-polarizing way. For a lot of people, I think "race" just means "big group of people with common ancestry." Which...is not an unreasonable way to think about it, even if that's not true.
-
-
-
yeah. that's fair. Might make for a good standalone piece explaining the difference.
-
As long as you are in the business of explaining important issues, I'd love a piece that unpacks the genetics-IQ stuff in a way people can understand. As I see it, many of the race = IQ folks are thinking about it something like this...
-
"Well, one individual can clearly have genes that influence intelligence. And those genes seem to run in families. Doesn't it make sense that such genes would also run in larger groups of people related by ancestry?" Unpacking the problems with that logic wld do a huge service.
-
but yeah, overall, more clarity, more explaining is better!
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Yes, race is socially constructed so individuals with significant non-African ancestry like Barack Obama, Kamala Harris, and Valerie Jarrett are still considered black. This is a very smart argument that disproves racism.
-
Species is socially constructed too, and there are ligers - but that doesn’t mean lions and tigers aren’t different. This is all obfuscation and sophistry designed to own the racists, but it ends up being a self-own.
-
An even better example might be grizzly bears and polar bears. Their offspring is fertile, so according to the biological species concept they would be the exact same species and just different races of bear.
-
Interesting. So why aren't they considered the same specious? Is it because that would impede scaremongering about vanishing polar bears?
-
Well, there's no consensus on which species concept is the "best", but the biological one is the most cut-and-dry. I do wonder if there are people that fear that designating these bears as sub-species of the same species would make people think about about taxonomy of human races
-
Well the same could be said about how we define them as different species now. They are so different in their phenotypes there’s no way we can consider them the same species. Imagine if we applied that to humans.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
So what, exactly, is the difference between race and ancestry?
-
One is really, really bad, maybe the worst thing in the universe. The other is SCIENCE, which is okay so long as you make very very clear it’s not the really really bad, evil thing.https://g.co/kgs/a7CPNV
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm so happy you say these things. This is exactly why whites are leaving the left in droves and rushing into the arms of White Nationalism. Just insane babble statements like "race doesn't exist, except it obvs does, but only when we say it does in our specific science terms."
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Please explain. Thanks.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is cognitive dissonance heritable? Anyway, sure can be grating.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Can't you guys just shorthand it by saying "Looking at someone won't tell you anything about their intelligence, at least not beyond their SES"? There's a role for historians here too.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.