PC Principal thread

[dasva]

What amount of genetic variation constitutes a difference in race?

The exact amount is clearly somewhat subjective because we can't very well look at someone and look at a number above their head saying .002% variance or some shit but the existence and basis of the general concept isn't. Should also note it is usually self identifying. The average person might think there might be maybe 10 difference races but you go around to these places and the people themselves will identify the small differences between their neighbor and as such a different race to the point I think there are like 150ish

[TheDirtyHobo]

What amount of genetic variation constitutes a difference in race?

That, and how important those differences are, are determined by culture. But the fact that those differences are indeed there is undeniable.

[Thunder]

@Thunder
Except that's, again, letting the narrative (of wanting race to be a cultural construct) decide the facts. Race is a thing that exists with or without humans. Period. Human intervention tends to accelerate or accentuate it (dogs, apples, etc), but it also happens naturally. Two populations of a species become isolated and naturally diverge, first racially, then sub-specially, then specially.

I wasn't actually saying anything myself, just interpreting what zoob said (think I did a good job). I don't have a dog in this race (lul puns)

I just felt obligated to idk, direct?, the conversation a bit better since byrth misinterpreted the absolute hell out of zoob. In retrospect I shouldn't have even posted

Although, just to point out (god dammit now I'm involved and can't help myself being a part of the discussion lol);

• Race is a thing that exists with or without humans. Period
• That, and how important those differences are, are determined by culture.

Aren't those two points contradictions? Without humans there wouldn't be culture to determine race?

[Niiro]

The exact amount is clearly somewhat subjective because we can't very well look at someone and look at a number above their head saying .002% variance or some shit but the existence and basis of the general concept isn't. Should also note it is usually self identifying. The average person might think there might be maybe 10 difference races but you go around to these places and the people themselves will identify the small differences between their neighbor and as such a different race to the point I think there are like 150ish

That, and how important those differences are, are determined by culture. But the fact that those differences are indeed there is undeniable.

You both just made the point for me that race is a subjective human construct.

Genetic variations exist to many varying degrees, but there is no such thing as a point where one race becomes another race without drawing a completely arbitrary line in the sand.

If one person says there's 10 races and another says there's 150, either one of them has to be right or the term "race" has to be arbitrary.

[Galkaeater]

I think the dude meant: boyz = blue, grills = pink*. Not the em spectrum.

*Said claim is only supported by a horrific feminazi website.

nah I ment the colour categories, some cultures don't distinguish between blue and green for example.

[Byrthnoth]

So you guys just think we need a Westminster Kennel Club for humans.

[BerenTebogo]

nah I ment the colour categories, some cultures don't distinguish between blue and green for example.

#NotAllWavelengths

[Niiro]

So you guys just think we need a Westminster Kennel Club for humans.

[TheDirtyHobo]

You both just made the point for me that race is a subjective human construct.

Genetic variations exist to many varying degrees, but there is no such thing as a point where one race becomes another race without drawing a completely arbitrary line in the sand.

If one person says there's 10 races and another says there's 150, either one of them has to be right or the term "race" has to be arbitrary.

Right, where precisely that line is drawn is arbitrary and culturally created. The fact that there are major differences in genetic trends between two separate populations of the same species is not arbitrary.

[zoobernut]

So you think there are different races inside of animals? Would you consider Neanderthals a different race or different species? Homo Sapiens did interbreed with them but they (as far as I know) are considered a different hominid species.

For the most part Thunder did a pretty good interpretation and I have no idea what the hell Byr was reading but it certainly wasn't anything that I wrote.

I guess if I use the idea of sub-species as an analog for race and take out the social aspects of it I can see DirtyHobo's point.

How is a sub-species defined scientifically? Is that difference similar or greater than the genetic differences between what people consider to be races of humans?

It seems like race takes on a more qualitative definition in discussions like these when I want to hear a more quantitative definition.

Edit: I am not taking a hard stance on this I am actually curious about how people define race and what it actually constitutes. Is it only phenotypic variations that define race or other variations? How much genetic variation can you find within a single race and how does that compare to the average genetic variation between different races?

In another animal species how much genetic variation is there while still being considered a single species?

Did anyone here study anthropology?

[Salodin]

It's tough to bring up interbreeding with Neanderthals when grizzly bears and polar bears are different species that still produce offspring. There is no arbitrary line between different species or races but they are there.

Or is some one pretending that people from different parts of the world don't generally suffer from different tendancies determined by genetics, like fewer sweat glands in Asians, blood pressure concerns from Africans, etc.

[zoobernut]

It's tough to bring up interbreeding with Neanderthals when grizzly bears and polar bears are different species that still produce offspring. There is no arbitrary line between different species or races but they are there.

Or is some one pretending that people from different parts of the world don't generally suffer from different tendancies determined by genetics, like fewer sweat glands in Asians, blood pressure concerns from Africans, etc.

That is a very good point I forgot about grizzly bears and polar bears. I believe their offspring are not sterile either and can go on to breed. Though most other interspecies breeding I can think of results in a non viable offspring like mules.

I still think Neanderthals is an interesting concept though if they were still around today (hypothetically) would we consider them a different species or just a race of humans?

Edit: Reading about the biological definition of a species I see that there is a thing known as The Species Problem in biology talking about this issue exactly.

[Ksandra]

Though most other interspecies breeding I can think of results in a non viable offspring like mules.

To throw into the mix, there are very few rare cases where mules do produce an offspring.


I can see how there are genetic tendencies in races listed above, and the concept does make sense. Different areas were going to keep breeding offspring with each other allowing certain genetic codes to be passed down.

When all my friends and I seemed to be going through baby phases, all but one of my asian friends got pregnancy diabetes. And no, they are not overweight. Two are like stick figures. I believe a few of the doctors had warned them at the start they were high risk. And to be fair, doctors should explain these risks and to do so, we kind of have to keep documenting the concept.

I understand the lash against it because of how minorities are treated, and no one wants to feel "different." Bit it's not that we shouldn't think race exists, we should just not treat people poorly for being X race.

[zoobernut]

Ksandra that ultimately is the most important thing. We shouldn't treat people poorly for being any particular race. Too bad historically race along with cultural differences has been used as a tool against people to control them and oppress them.

[TheDirtyHobo]

How is a sub-species defined scientifically? Is that difference similar or greater than the genetic differences between what people consider to be races of humans?

It seems like race takes on a more qualitative definition in discussions like these when I want to hear a more quantitative definition.

Race has a scientific definition, too. It's less variation than sub-species.

[zoobernut]

Race has a scientific definition, too. It's less variation than sub-species.

What is the scientific definition of race? Searching I have not been able to find anything. Race always seems to be mostly societally driven rather than having a scientific definition.

I can see if there was a scientific definition of race then I would agree with your original statement.

[TheDirtyHobo]

More variation than a strain, less variation than a sub-species.

[zoobernut]

More variation than a strain, less variation than a sub-species.

I still cannot find any indication that is a scientifically accepted definition for race.

Edit: Interesting Newsweek article on the matter. http://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123

Interesting point made in that article is that there is greater genetic variation within a race of people than between different races.

Another interesting paper on the matter. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23684745
From the National Center for Biotechnology Information.

[Ragnus]

So I guess that girl from UMass has been memeified into Trigglypuff

http://knowyourmeme.com/memes/trigglypuff

[BerenTebogo]

I still cannot find any indication that is a scientifically accepted definition for race.

Edit: Interesting Newsweek article on the matter. http://www.newsweek.com/there-no-such-thing-race-283123

Interesting point made in that article is that there is greater genetic variation within a race of people than between different races.

Another interesting paper on the matter. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23684745
From the National Center for Biotechnology Information.

Too ambien to check thoroughly. Please enjoy. https://books.google.com/books?hl=en...asured&f=false