I don’t understand the claim that @Quillette is pushing for “race-based social policy” here @EPoe187 and I argue the exact oppositehttps://quillette.com/2016/06/23/on-the-reality-of-race-and-the-abhorrence-of-racism/ …
-
Show this thread
-
I read this the first time you published it and had a discussion later with your brother about it. When you talk about 'race' you aren't actually referring to the racial definitions that are commonly used, are you?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Depends. Asian, Black, and White are commonly used categories.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
so you think they are useful terms?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
I do, yes. 1) people self identify using these categories and 2) they correspond to populations with slightly different evolutionary histories and ancestry (which is picked up in cluster analysis) Of course this is not to say that the categories cannot be further subdivided.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
there is a 'white' race is there?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Roughly speaking it makes sense to use the term. Though in cluster analysis at K = 5 it’s Europe + Middle East + Central and South Asia. No doubt racial terms are a combination of lineage-based and socially-constructed categories.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
at k=5 ? how many variations do you have for K ?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Many. Hence my point that how we define race is partially a social construction. A claim every “race realist” I’ve ever talked to agrees with.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like
Sure. Lots of people agree with the claim and then proceed as if “white, black and Asian” are completely discrete, scientific categories. As soon as two people from different groups have a child together, the scientific construction of those categories goes kaput
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.