Philosophy Now Forum

Seleucus wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:06 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:43 amargue ,as you do, that might is right.

Can you use the convenient quote function to show that please. Here is the link to all my posts ---> search.php?author_id=14903&sr=posts

You are in the right to demand quotations. Sorry but I cannot quote you directly. If I am wrong about your predilection for the superiority of white northern Europeans, and Trump, I would be pleased if you denied it.

"But I'm still waiting on those scholarly articles supporting your claim that the Black race is more genetically varied than the White race?"

Seleuctus, you wrote the above, addressed to me in the post.

You... are... fucked in the head. In a really major sort of way.

I'm not even going to refer you to the reference I made to the above reference which you denied.

So... in summary... you are not worth the printing ink typed on the screen to respond to your posts.

You are worth less intellectually than a cockroach. You are the pariah of intellect, you are the growth of insanity on the culture of this Petri dish we call Philosophy Now.

And the sad thing is that you can't see this. Your performance and your inability to judge the same are a typical case of Catch 22. Too bad for you this is not the army, you could get out of here in an instant. Too bad for us this is not the army, we have to put up with you indefinitely, and likely for a very long time.

-1- wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 8:19 pm "But I'm still waiting on those scholarly articles supporting your claim that the Black race is more genetically varied than the White race?"

Seleuctus, you wrote the above, addressed to me in the post.

You... are... fucked in the head. In a really major sort of way.

I'm not even going to refer you to the reference I made to the above reference which you denied.

So... in summary... you are not worth the printing ink typed on the screen to respond to your posts.

You are worth less intellectually than a cockroach. You are the pariah of intellect, you are the growth of insanity on the culture of this Petri dish we call Philosophy Now.

There’s a ton of stuff on this subject the Internet — this douchebag seleucus could easily do the research himself — but here is elementary article for him to fail to read or understand:

Do Races Differ? Not Really, Genes Show

From the article:

Through transglobal sampling of neutral genetic markers -- stretches of genetic material that do not help create the body's functioning proteins but instead are composed of so-called junk DNA -- researchers have found that, on average, 88 percent to 90 percent of the differences between people occur within their local populations, while only about 10 percent to 12 percent of the differences distinguish one population, or race, from another.

Also from the article:

''Race is a social concept, not a scientific one,'' said Dr. J. Craig Venter, head of the Celera Genomics Corporation in Rockville, Md. ''We all evolved in the last 100,000 years from the same small number of tribes that migrated out of Africa and colonized the world.’’

And:

Dr. Venter and other researchers say that those traits most commonly used to distinguish one race from another, like skin and eye color, or the width of the nose, are traits controlled by a relatively few number of genes, and thus have been able to change rapidly in response to extreme environmental pressures during the short course of Homo sapiens history.

And so equatorial populations evolved dark skin, presumably to protect against ultraviolet radiation, while people in northern latitudes evolved pale skin, the better to produce vitamin D from pale sunlight.

''If you ask what percentage of your genes is reflected in your external appearance, the basis by which we talk about race, the answer seems to be in the range of .01 percent,'' said Dr. Harold P. Freeman, the chief executive, president and director of surgery at North General Hospital in Manhattan, who has studied the issue of biology and race. ''This is a very, very minimal reflection of your genetic makeup.’’

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:16 pm

Seleucus wrote:How much Whiter can you get than Alexander the Great and he married an Asian? ...

And he would have had no truck with 'race supremacy' eh!

Would you mind stop insinuating I'm a neo-Nazi, it's insulting and unsubstantiatable.

Seleucus wrote:Would you mind stop insinuating I'm a neo-Nazi, it's insulting and unsubstantiatable.

Why is saying Alexander would have no truck with race supremacy saying that you are a neo-nazi?

Your posting of stormfart links, et al does that for you.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 5:16 pm

You actually know a lot about Seleucid times without even knowing it, Hannibal retired to the Seleucid court and the Book of Maccabees and Hanukkah both come out of that period.

Like I've said, who gives a toss.

I guess that sux for you if you've got no interest in history. Pretty amazing stuff for those who have the character to appreciate it. Speaking for myself I really got into Hellenistic history about three years ago now and took a special interest in the Seleucids for reasons I've already mentioned.

Seleucus wrote:I guess that sux for you if you've got no interest in history. ...

No, I have a great interest in History as I'm a cultural economic imperialist and historical materialist.

Pretty amazing stuff for those who have the character to appreciate it. ...

Sure, it's always great to seek that which supports you.

Speaking for myself I really got into Hellenistic history about three years ago now and took a special interest in the Seleucids for reasons I've already mentioned.

You and all the other race supremacists we've had here so far.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 4:57 pmnone of it answers my questions.

Here is one question that would be interesting to answer...

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 3:03 pm

This isn't the first depressive episode in the history of our civilization. ...

What 'civilization'? There has been no 'white' civilization, just white nations.

In older times it was assumed that there was one world human civilization, a history book would typically present this narrative as the passing of the torch of civilization on from one peoples to another. But in the 60s it became trendy to speak instead of civilizations. African civilization, Islamic civilization and so on. But de Maistre presents a different view, which is that advancement towards the stars is the automatic nature of mankind. It could be argued that nearly all the major inventions of the Old World like the wheel or writing happened only one time and were then disseminated through cultural transmission. But when when we look at the New World civilizations, it is very strange how similarly they developed and communication was almost certainly impossible (barring a few historical anomalies that are probably hoaxes). This seems to imply, that contra the fragmented 60s view of civilization, the traditional view of one human civilization is as good a way of looking at it.

Arising_uk wrote: ↑Wed Nov 01, 2017 3:53 amYou and all the other race supremacists we've had here so far.

Hard to believe. I've only ever met one other person who has a hobby, as opposed to academic, interest in the Seleucids. He is a Filipino. Just as some White people are crazy for Japanese culture, in this case, this Filipino fellow is in love with the Greek East.

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 6:46 pm

Seleucus wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 12:06 pm

Belinda wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 10:43 amargue ,as you do, that might is right.

Can you use the convenient quote function to show that please. Here is the link to all my posts ---> search.php?author_id=14903&sr=posts

You are in the right to demand quotations. Sorry but I cannot quote you directly. If I am wrong about your predilection for the superiority of white northern Europeans, and Trump, I would be pleased if you denied it.

So, no quote coming then? By the way, where did "northern" come in from, your Nazi fantasy? I prefer my own people just as anyone prefers their own bed or their own shoes. So what? Every one in the world has the right to racial and cultural and linguistic and spiritual pride, but if that person happens to be White, than they must be a genocidal war mongerer? That's silly nonsense and the ideation of Frankfurt School intoxicated mind. But yes, where I American I absolutely would have voted for Trump. He's reinvigorated a democracy that had become a choice between Coke and Pepsi. If you voted for Trump, your vote made a difference. Trump is going to save the productive working class which is what a free democracy depends on, and the people and culture that supports that political system.

-1- wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 8:19 pm "But I'm still waiting on those scholarly articles supporting your claim that the Black race is more genetically varied than the White race?"

Seleuctus, you wrote the above, addressed to me in the post.

You... are... fucked in the head. In a really major sort of way.

No, you quoted the wrong post which is obvious by just scrolling through the thread. Save yourself the continued embarrassment and just let it go. Take a deep breath and try to have reasonable discussion, or has it gone beyond that point for you and you're pathological, which is my view of what political correctness is: a cognitive distortion.

you can't see this
Your
your
you
you could

Hmm... Is this a pattern I've noticed before in this discussion?

You are worth less intellectually than a cockroach. You are the pariah of intellect, you are the growth of insanity on the culture of this Petri dish we call Philosophy Now.

No positive agenda at all, eh? Just reactivity.

davidm wrote: ↑Tue Oct 31, 2017 8:42 pmThere’s a ton of stuff on this subject the Internet — this douchebag seleucus could easily do the research himself — but here is elementary article for him to fail to read or understand:

Do Races Differ? Not Really, Genes Show

I read the article because I'm an open minded kind of person who likes to get the whole picture. But I don't see anything supporting your bogus claim that Blacks are more genetically diverse than Whites?

What I was really wanting though was not a leftist NY Times opinion piece but some scholarly articles.

So for example,

said Dr. J. Craig Venter, head of the Celera Genomics Corporation in Rockville, Md. ''We all evolved in the last 100,000 years from the same small number of tribes that migrated out of Africa and colonized the world.’’

From Venter we would get some articles like these and look at his research work:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/a904/5 ... e28782.pdf

http://science.sciencemag.org/content/301/5632/466

Basically what Venter is saying here is that let's say I look like a White man. And I go to the doctor and I have, say, abdominal inflammation, maybe the doctor is going to order tests for Crohn’s disease because it mostly affects White people like Europeans and Jews and Arabs. But what if, genetically I actually have a gene from an Red Indian, so what I really have is Diabetes Mellitus which American Indians are prone to. The doctor has ordered costly tests and maybe even put my health and life in danger by misjudging me as White rather than looking at my genes.

Notice that Venter is not saying anything about culture and politics, which is what this discussion is about, he's talking about medicine. The article is just a red herring. My point all along has been that race and cultural elements tend to correlate, and that actually societal integration doesn't usually happen because people strongly believe in their identities, therefore, bringing very large numbers of (im)migrants into Western societies is highly dangerous since it will ultimately lead to the undermining of our societies and our values like freedom, democracy, women's rights, freedom of religion, and fitness and environmentalism with foreign ways like authoritarianism and littering.

''If you ask what percentage of your genes is reflected in your external appearance, the basis by which we talk about race, the answer seems to be in the range of .01 percent,'' said Dr. Harold P. Freeman, the chief executive, president and director of surgery at North General Hospital in Manhattan, who has studied the issue of biology and race. ''This is a very, very minimal reflection of your genetic makeup.’’

But what you didn't quote, from your same article, is this paragraph,

"Yet not every researcher sees race as a meaningless or antediluvian notion. ''I think racial classifications have been useful to us,'' said Dr. Alan Rogers, a population geneticist and professor of anthropology at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City. ''We may believe that most differences between races are superficial, but the differences are there, and they are informative about the origins and migrations of our species. To do my work, I have to get genetic data from different parts of the world, and look at differences within groups and between groups, so it helps to have labels for groups.''

Then the article goes on to the issue of race and IQ and concludes with exactly my own view as I have written more than once in this discussion:

"Dr. Eric S. Lander, a genome expert at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass., admits that, because research on the human genome has just begun, he cannot deliver a definitive, knockout punch".

And finally, and this is certainly my view, "''There's no scientific evidence to support substantial differences between groups". I couldn't agree more.

I'm not sure what you expected this opinion piece was supposed to prove? It doesn't say anything about Blacks being more genetically varied than Whites. It's about the relevance of race categorization to medical practice so it's pretty much irrelevant to this discussion. And the article supports my view, though no "knock out punch", that culture and not genetics is that account for the political and behavioral differences between the races. So, what is your point? The most likely explanation is that you are so locked into your delusional dualistic politically correct narrative you can't stop projecting straw men and actually understand what my position really is. Could you go ahead and in a few sentences summarize my position on the topic of race and culture?

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:54 pm

Seleucus wrote: ↑Thu Oct 26, 2017 5:19 pm

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: ↑Thu Oct 26, 2017 3:42 pmWhy do blacks hate this? Deep down it's because everyone knows that blacks, left to their own devices, would have a collapsed infrastructure, and could not support their own society, and they'd need help from, a least a few whites to run it. Therefore everybody knows that segregation, deep down, would be hurting the blacks.

Not sure if everyone knows this, but it is true. Plenty of examples from what happened at the end of colonization or apartheid.

What Trixie wrote is deeply revealing of patronising attitude which is not as bad as actual cruelty but is oppressive.
But when black skinned people have learned to live in an environment as enriched as some white skinned people's environments the black skinned people are as able as the white skinned people.

Your examples of post- colonial misrule was caused by the white ruling classes failing to adequately prepare governed classes for self rule. Education and skills matter. Government and admin are learned skills.

African Americans get inferior schools, and generally lack tertiary education.

I Don't Think You Have Ever Been To an All Black School.

I have.

No it is not a secret conspiracy of white-teachers to keep them down. In my experience the white teachers tried their best and were nothing but nice, but no matter hard they tried the students were simply in·cor·ri·gi·ble.

Please watch a movie, it is called "moonlight".
It will help illustrate something.

Or don't.
Just keep repeating the same SJW dogma you've been brainwashed to believe, that we are all in happy lala land and genetics do not exist...

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote: ↑Wed Nov 01, 2017 6:09 am

Belinda wrote: ↑Thu Oct 26, 2017 11:54 pm

Seleucus wrote: ↑Thu Oct 26, 2017 5:19 pm
Not sure if everyone knows this, but it is true. Plenty of examples from what happened at the end of colonization or apartheid.

What Trixie wrote is deeply revealing of patronising attitude which is not as bad as actual cruelty but is oppressive.
But when black skinned people have learned to live in an environment as enriched as some white skinned people's environments the black skinned people are as able as the white skinned people.

Your examples of post- colonial misrule was caused by the white ruling classes failing to adequately prepare governed classes for self rule. Education and skills matter. Government and admin are learned skills.

African Americans get inferior schools, and generally lack tertiary education.

I Don't Think You Have Ever Been To an All Black School.

I have.

No it is not a secret conspiracy of white-teachers to keep them down. In my experience the white teachers tried their best and were nothing but nice, but no matter hard they tried the students were simply in·cor·ri·gi·ble.

Please watch a movie, it is called "moonlight".
It will help illustrate something.

Or don't.
Just keep repeating the same SJW dogma you've been brainwashed to believe, that we are all in happy lala land and genetics do not exist...

You are expecting teachers to carry the full weight of social deprivation?

GreatandWiseTrixie wrote:...
I Don't Think You Have Ever Been To an All Black School.

I have. ...

Are you black?

No it is not a secret conspiracy of white-teachers to keep them down. In my experience the white teachers tried their best and were nothing but nice, but no matter hard they tried the students were simply in·cor·ri·gi·ble.
...
Or don't.
Just keep repeating the same SJW dogma you've been brainwashed to believe, that we are all in happy lala land and genetics do not exist...

I doubt this has anything to do with being black per se, more to do with being a black American. As black students in the rest of the world seem to be much of a much with any student.