/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.6920291]

Is race a social construct?

[Anonymous No.6920294]

Out current definitions may be. But that these are different races is pretty well established.

[Anonymous No.6920295]

Sociology isn't science or math.

[Anonymous No.6920299]

yes

[Anonymous No.6920301]

>>6920291
Why does it matter of race is a social construct?

[Anonymous No.6920317]

>>6920291
>Is race a social construct?

Yes

[Anonymous No.6920327]

>>6920291
>Is race a social construct?
NO

These guys:
>>6920299
>>6920301
>>6920317
Are all lying kikes.

[Anonymous No.6920340]

>>6920291
the idea of genetic differences between humans due to separated lineage is not a construct, obviously.

The way we categorize people and mark a hard line between these categories is a social construct (how many "black" people need to be in your family tree for you to be "black"? how many before you're "mixed"? Does this same number hold for "white" or "asian"?), as is the undue importance we place on it.

[Anonymous No.6920372]

There is no biological basis for racial categories and no relationship between classification based on observed physical characteristics and patterns of thought or behavior.

Humans do not have separate subspecies or races the way some animals do, and genetic traits like skin color are inherited separately from other physical and mental traits, such as eye and hair features, blood type, hand-eye coordination, and memory.

[Anonymous No.6920376]

>>6920291
Race is a social construct. There are studies showing how mixed-race people are likely to suffer mental problems because they have to choose an identity. On the other side, I haven't seen mulattoes on Dominican-Republic suffer problems from being half-black and half-white.

[Anonymous No.6920387]

>>6920376

I'm half hispanic half white and I didn't suffer from mental problems because I had to choose an identity.

[Anonymous No.6920388]

>>6920376
if race is social construct then why eugenic works.

[Anonymous No.6920390]

ITT: Left-wing morons who make judgements based on their feelings. Possibly the most retarded is this fecophile:
>>6920372
>no relationship between classification based on observed characteristics

You simply cannot allow yourself to be this braindead.

[Anonymous No.6920397]

>>6920390
read his post gain

[Anonymous No.6920400]

>>6920372
But that isn't true.

Humans are animals just like any other, and we have subspecies with different intelligences and aggression levels just like the other animals do.

[Anonymous No.6920403]

>>6920397
Oh, I see it now. He's still wrong, though.

[Anonymous No.6920406]

>>6920390
>Country = race
Are you a member of the American race?

[Anonymous No.6920410]

>>6920406
I don't know the context of that map but maybe it's referring to indigenous people of the Americas as a general genetic group.

[Anonymous No.6920411]

>>6920406
>confusing continents with countries
Come on now nobody can be this stupid.

[Anonymous No.6920413]

>>6920372
>no relationship between classification based on observed physical characteristics and patterns of thought or behavior.
If you're including statistical differences in populations that have been thus classified, then you're incorrect.

[Anonymous No.6920414]

>>6920400
So much stupidity, so little time:
1. Subspecies are not races
2. Subspecies are not characterized by levels of intelligence or aggression
3. Humans are not analogous to animal populations in this context because we have a high amount of genetic flow; populations are not isolated.

[Anonymous No.6920418]

>>6920411
But are continents races? Are you a member of the American race?

[Anonymous No.6920441]

>>6920291
Well it is a construct, I don't know if it is a social one.
The classification of animals (and human) is something made by humans. Nowhere on DNA you will find a label like "This is a horse" and "this is a donkey".
We classify them based on genetic difference.

Are we different enough from black people to be a new classification? I don't care. But there are differences in our genetic code other than the amount of melanin we produce.

[Anonymous No.6920443]

>>6920406
It has nothing to do with country moron, when it says America it means Amerindians. You are really fucking stupid.

[Anonymous No.6920446]

>>6920443
Are the actually still pure Amerindians left?

[Anonymous No.6920447]

>>6920418
Generally speaking, every continent defines a finite set of ethnicities which hold some kind of correlation between them.

So yes, there are american ethnicities, european ethnicites... Maybe you've heard of Indoeuropean ethnicities. (Yes, ethnicities, not race, but no one spoke of races to start with).

[Anonymous No.6920451]

>>6920390
>>6920400

Sorry, but 0.15 will never equal 0.33 no mater how badly you torture the math.

[Anonymous No.6920455]

>>6920443
Wrong again retard, the study that image is from sampled populations, not races

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0888754310001552

[Anonymous No.6920463]

>>6920447
This entire thread is about race. Read the OP.

[Anonymous No.6920468]

>>6920446
Yes. Do you really believe there are zero Amerindians? Less pure ones sure, but the classification includes both pure and non-pure Amerindians.

Note that impure Amerindians still cluster quite close to the pure ones, this is because their genes are relatively dominant compared to European ones. Also keep in mind that this chart also has a third dimension—some groups that seem close are actually sometimes behind each other.

>>6920455
Did you fucking read? 13 populations with different races included. Don't say shit without thinking it through. It shows clearly that people were sampled from various races and locations.

[Anonymous No.6920469]

>>6920291
Well, there are certain groups of people with slightly different physiognomy. These differences are mirrored in differences in the genome as well, however the segmentations are pretty random, there's no real reason to say there are blacks and whites and asians, as the difference between an asian and a european is usually smaller than the genetic difference between two random black people. So a misbelief is probably that the color of the skin is such a big deal. It really is not, at least genetically speaking.

[Anonymous No.6920471]

>>6920468
>Did you fucking read? 13 populations with different races included.
Race is not mentioned anywhere in the paper. So apparently you're the one can't read.

[Anonymous No.6920472]

>>6920468
>Yes. Do you really believe there are zero Amerindians?
Non American here, I just thought most of them would be mutts by now. But I can understand some of them trying to preserve their genes and culture a bit.

[Anonymous No.6920473]

>>6920463
Well, then we can argue if ethnicity=race. Take that as you wish, I'm not going to enter that debate, but if you recognize the existence of multiple races you pretty much recognize ethnicities are these races.

Take my original post as ethnicities=races.

[Anonymous No.6920477]

>>6920473
I don't think such an argument is productive. Race is not defined coherently enough to make such distinctions.

[Anonymous No.6920481]

>>6920291
No, race is based off of biology. Every race is noticeably genetically and physiologically different from another race.

[Anonymous No.6920484]

>>6920418
The races are a result of isolation on different continents.

There are 4 races of humanity: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid and Australoid.

Europe, Africa, East Asia, and Australia respectively.

[Anonymous No.6920486]

>>6920477
Fair enough.

[Anonymous No.6920488]

If we bred humans in the way we breed dogs, could we create very distinct races?

Like people that are 50cm tall and then others that are 3m tall

[Anonymous No.6920489]

>>6920471
If there are populations taken from the various locations they have listed, there will be different races. Not even you are this stupid.

See pic related? Those are composed of many different races from the populations chosen.

[Anonymous No.6920496]

>>6920488
Yes, but it takes longer due to us having to wait 13 years for each generation.

We already have pretty distinctive races, btw.

[Anonymous No.6920501]

>>6920484
>The races are a result of isolation on different continents.
Exactly. Such isolation no longer exists.

>There are 4 races of humanity: Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid and Australoid.
This is completely arbitrary.

[Anonymous No.6920505]

>>6920484
An old, and false idea.

There are many more races, each originating for various isolated populations across the world.

The best way of categorizing them seems to be mtDNA haplogroups. Using such definitions, the mutations of DNA and different groups can be more easily defined.

[Anonymous No.6920506]

>>6920489
Yes, so what does the study say about races?

[Anonymous No.6920507]

>>6920488
If we compromise for health then yes such a thing would be possible.

It's been speculated that when we have space colonies like on Mars there would not be enough gene flow between the 2 populations so specification can occur.
Of course this could take ages before actual breeding between Martians and Earthlings becomes impossible.

[Anonymous No.6920517]

>>6920506
The point of the study was to map out the genetic variation of the human subspecies throughout the world. As you can see in the study, there are clusters that clearly show the genetic variation in the different populations. Just because it doesn't explicitly say "race" doesn't invalidate the point. If you weren't either severely autistic or just dishonest, you would admit that.

[Anonymous No.6920518]

>>6920488

Dogs haven't well defined races in the biological definition of it, they have breeds

[Anonymous No.6920520]

>>6920501
>such isolation no longer exists.

But it did exist. For tens of thousands of years. And has only very (in the past 300 years or so) recently been ended. If you actually look at marrage and reproduction statistics, outside of the largest population areas most breeding pools are actually still fairly isolated. You are most likely to reproduce with someone who grew up within something like 20 miles of where you were born. Travel is easier, moving to different parts of the world is much easier, but the exceptions to the rule are actually much more rare than you think. Most of the 3rd world is still isolated for the most part, poor parts of the arab and latin world as well as asia. Even if them emmigrate to a place like America or Europe, they stay in isolated population areas (e.g. China Towns around the world).

The flow of genetics has been widened somewhat, but it is a trickle, not a river, even in places that consciously encourage interracial marriage.

[Anonymous No.6920526]

>>6920517
>subspecies
Nope, try again. Maybe you should read the entire study. The fact that the study doesn't study races and in fact doesn't even separate them in the data invalidates the idea that it can be used to conclude anything about race.

[Anonymous No.6920541]

>>6920526
> The fact that the study doesn't study races
Too bad that it does by default because there were different races involved in the study; try being less of a fucking moron next time.

>and in fact doesn't even separate them in the data
Yup, you are indeed an idiot. The graph I posted here:>>6920390 clearly shows that the populations are separated by race in the PC chart. From that we can conclude that they are genetically different. Are you just stubborn or retarded?