Are people who deny the FACT that we're all one race racist? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Are people who deny the FACT that we're all one race racist?
in Politics

By YeshuaRedeemedYeshuaRedeemed 362 Pts edited March 2
People who deny the FACT that we're all one race are racist. Change my mind.
Zombieguy1987piloteer
About Persuade Me

Persuaded Argument

  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    Winning Argument ✓
    Zombieguy1987



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted 2nd Place
33%
Margin

Details +



Arguments

  • If you don't like being called a racist, don't be a racist.
    Zombieguy1987
  • You should first elaborate on this "fact" unknown to science and common sense. Then maybe we will have something to work on in order to try to change your mind.

    If we were all one race, then we were all zero races, because the term "race" would be redundant. This sentence does not work well, and you should rephrase it somehow. 

    Your actual point is "race does not matter", is it not? If that is the case, then your mind does not need to be changed. What needs to be changed is your ability to articulate what it is you are trying to say. And that can be difficult, when you block everyone who attempts to help you with that.
    piloteerZombieguy1987WordsMatter
  • DeeDee 313 Pts
    edited February 28
    @YeshuaBought

    Your merely spouting out your ignorant uninformed opinions and saying they are  fact and anyone who disagrees is a racist is yet another reason why an ignoramus like you should be put in a glass case in a museum and studied by future generations as to the damage American religious nuts do their own children ..... The sign  on your glass case could say “ early example of religious indoctrination American style “ people could then stare at the countenance staring  back at them which would resemble the look of a stunned cat looking into the headlights of a speeding oncoming truck on a winters evening 
    piloteerZombieguy1987
  • Yes we are the human “race.” But that type of race just implies what species we are. We humans broke ourselves down into different skin color races, just like there are different types o other animals.
    piloteerZombieguy1987Oppolzer
    Sovereignty for Kekistan
  • @Dee Who the blank cares about skin color? I guess George Orewell's 1984 is here, where racial unity is the new ignorance?
    Zombieguy1987
  • @AmericanFurryBoy So you're saying that evolution is true?
    Zombieguy1987AmericanFurryBoy
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1595 Pts
    @piloteer

    This is a poor interpretation of what the actual science is saying. There was a strong research group in the field a few decades ago that did a thorough study of alleged races and came to the conclusion that "race" is not a strict construct. Among their key findings were the following:
    - All of the modern people seem to share common ancestors.
    - Races are a continuum; there is no "purely Asian" or "purely Arab" person.
    - There can be far more differences between two members of one race, than between members of different races.
    - People tend to point out the superficial differences (such as skin color or eye shape) and define the race based on those, while in reality those are only a small part of the equation.

    These findings were later politicised, and the narrative changed from "races do not matter" to "races do not exist". But this is not at all what the science says.

    The article you linked recognises all these facts and debunks the scientific basis behind racism - but it does not debunk the concept of "race". It just shows how a lot of people judging others based on their races are mistaken (and, indeed, they are), which it no the same as what the article title claims.

    People are confused about these things, because the topic of racism is very emotional, and one cannot mention the concept of race without immediately causing some strong emotional reactions in others. But replace "race" with something less controversial, and you will suddenly see how misleading this narrative is. If I say, "Eye color does not have a scientific basis. We all have the same eye color.", then you will think me color-blind or delirious, and for a good reason. It is the same with race. Races exist. Do they matter? No. But do they exist? Yes.
    DeeZombieguy1987
  • @MayCaesar Racist. Who CARES about skin color?
    Zombieguy1987
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    The findings are clear. "Race" is a socially fabricated thing, it's not founded in any scientific reason. Therefore, logic follows that those who identify as a member of a "race" is indeed a racist. 
    WordsMatterZombieguy1987
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 313 Pts
    edited March 1
    Specie, race, ethnicity... These all have overlapping meanings in day to day life but have precise definitions. They should be used appropriately but eh, intellectual laziness is rampant and we sometime want to take shortcuts...

    Fact is, the DNA of 2 humans chosen at random generally varies by less than 0.1 percent. This is less genetic variation than other types of hominids (such as chimpanzees and orangutans). Thus there really is just one human race in the scientific biological sense. 

    "Racism", relates to race like "Theism" relates to Theos (god), both are beliefs based on unfounded premises that a particular thing exists.

    So "racist" really means either "self-delusional" or "willfully ignorant" on specific concepts...

    Deepiloteer
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • DeeDee 313 Pts
    edited March 1
    Read below 
  • DeeDee 313 Pts
    edited March 1
    @piloteer @MayCaesar @Plaffelvohfen

    You and your friend are making a very direct accusation at me and anyone who disagrees with your assertions as in you've dammed me and others by using a historically damning  term against others who merely disagree with your assertions, the question as usual from this attention whore is used to create divisions .

    The question  as  correctly pointed by Maycaesar out is poorly worded and needs to be re -stated .

    Plaffelvohfen made some excellent points as did Maycaesar which have beaten me to the punch so I look forward to the responses if any , no doubt we will all get banned .

    Its also Hilarious this drama queen talks about being “an ethnic tribal belly dancer” who changed her name to an Arabic one and was mocked and then went on to attack the mockers for being .........RACIST ........I’m not really convinced she’s thought it through
    Plaffelvohfen
  • DeeDee 313 Pts
    @YeshuaBought

    How dare you brand another member racist and all that entails for merely disagreeing with you , why not try debating? You’re  a truly nasty person and yet you claim to walk in path of Jesus you ought to hang your head in shame 
  • DeeDee 313 Pts
    @YeshuaBought

    Welcome to the year 2019 newsflash .....Evolution is fact ....The religious nuts in America would love to drag America screaming , kicking , wailing back to the Bronze Age as that’s where their world view is based 
    Zombieguy1987
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1595 Pts
    @piloteer

    There are clear measurable statistical differences between the members of different races. Shrugging off statistical facts simply because they are politically inconvenient is an example of intellectual dishonesty. If you are honest, then you have to accept even those facts that disturb you.
    I myself am not a fan of the concept of "race"; I never use this term outside discussions such as this, and I could not care less what race people I am interacting with are. But science is what it is. Better accept the facts and move on, than get stuck on an erroneous narrative.

    Recognising the concept of race has nothing to do with racism. Racism is a theory of racial superiority. Recognising the statistical differences between races does not equal racial superiority, not any more than recognising that women are on average physically weaker than men equals gender superiority.

    Race as it is often understood may indeed be a socially fabricated thing. Race as a biological characterisation of certain aspects of the individual's physiology, on the other hand, is a pretty specific physical entity.
    PlaffelvohfenZombieguy1987
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @Dee

    I'm not accusing you or anybody of being racist. I'm sorry if you got the impression that I was making accusations against anybody. It's not my wish to do so in this thread because I don't actually know any of us on here, so it would be rude an ignorant of me to accuse anybody of anything. I'm only trying to prove a point. I hope you're not offended by anything I've said, and if you are, I hope you'll accept my apology.
    PlaffelvohfenDee
  • DeeDee 313 Pts
    edited March 1
    @piloteer

    Its all good my friend and I recognise you’re a good all round decent person who makes this place worthwhile , I was a bit annoyed earlier as I’m sick and tired of Y trying to goad and force points to suit her never ending always changing narrative , I offer you a handshake from across my corner of the world and look forward to talking and debating again 
    Plaffelvohfenpiloteer
  • @piloteer
    I never said that was a scientific fact. I just broke it down for @YeshuaBought.
    @YeshuaBought
    I never confirmed nor denied that evolution existed, how did you even get that out of my original argument?
    Zombieguy1987Plaffelvohfen
    Sovereignty for Kekistan
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    In light of the scientific study I've put forth, I challenge you to demonstrate those "clear measurable statistical differences between the members of different races."?!?!?!?
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @AmericanFurryBoy

    I never said you stated a scientific fact. All I said was science can prove that the concept of "race" is just a social construct, therefore, anybody who breaks down humanity into a category of "races", is a racist.
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @Plaffelvohfen

    You've basically summed up my whole argument. Science cannot verify the idea of "race". The specific traits that we(royal we) use to decipher one race from another are only social construction. I'm not arguing that people who invest in the idea of race consider their "race" to be superior, or they are prejudiced, but if they define humanity as several different "races", they are racist.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 313 Pts
    edited March 2
    @piloteer

    "...are only social construction."

    Honestly, I'm often tempted to say that Racism is, in some cases, a neurodevelopmental disorder, I'm still split between genetic disorder or psychological deprivation... Both could explain the obvious cognitive dissonance in the reasoning processes of avowed racists.  But in most cases of everyday racism, it's more of a social-adaptation disorder related to xenophobia. Racism is irrational.

    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @Plaffelvohfen

    I understand your line of thought, but science can't prove that neurological "disorders" aren't anything but social construction either. I'm not on here to point the finger at anybody. We were taught about "race" in school. I can't blame anybody for holding beliefs that they consider to be true. We were taught that we're different, so we will act accordingly. 
  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 313 Pts
    edited March 2
    @piloteer
    I'm not on here to point the finger at anybody
    Me neither, but I won't refrain from pointing at racism's irrationality... ;)
    We were taught about "race" in school.
    True, that's where my "psychological deprivation" was referring to... The first family circle, the extended family, friends, school, work... All overlapping concentric circles with the Mind at the center. This Mind must be nourished with rational answers to the questions he may ask, failing to do so (deprivation) promotes irrational thinking patterns and irrational behavior. 

    You are what you eat they say, the same goes with the Mind... Echo chambers are really dangerous place for minds to dwell...  :warning:
    science can't prove that neurological "disorders" aren't anything but social construction
    Of course it can, Down Syndrom IS a neurological disorder, it's based in empirical genetic evidences... Now, with regards to racism, I wouldn't dare compare Down Syndrom to racism, but Neuroscience is a really recent thing... There's no telling what we'll discover...

    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1595 Pts
    edited March 2
    @piloteer

    I could link the exact papers, but I do not like starting quote/link wars. I will just say that there are pretty significant statistical differences of such averaged properties as height, body mass, skin pigment content, ability to recognize visual patterns and many others. And those differences trespass the borders of areas historically dominated by the respective races and can be observed even in the societies in which all racial groups are relatively equally integrated, and have been for many centuries.

    This by no means implies that there is some inherent difference between people of different races, one that means anything practically beyond simple biological classification. But it does imply certain similarities in evolution of the majority of members of those groups. Of course those similarities are also not exhaustive; as the article you linked pointed out, there can be more genetic differences between two African people, than there is between, say, white and black people in Canada.

    Statistics is what it is: it does not describe strict laws and, instead, it describes overall trends. Denying statistics is pointless, as is trying to see something in it that is not there. In this regard, both racists and "race does not exist" crowds are mistaken. Races do exist, it is a statistical fact; races mean nothing socially in the objective sense, however. It is much like nationalities: there are Americans and there are Mexicans, and denying it would be strange - but so would be the argument that Mexicans and Americans are somehow inherently different as human beings, based solely on where they were born.
    Zombieguy1987
  • John_C_87John_C_87 108 Pts
    @YeshuaBought ;

    Race is a motive for crime. Racism is the crime of participating in a motive for a crime. Meaning the original crime is not necessary to be proven lower the burden of reasonable proof, only one type of motive need now proven. Those motive of race. The united state is that impartiality has been corrupted and therefor a motive must now be enough to convict crimes. Harassment is still harassment, verbal expression, is still a form of verbal harassment.

    Hate crime like racism is trying to interpret around double jeopardy, without a common defense to the general welfare using knowledge and not basic principle. A grievance is describe independent alongside Freedom of speech, press, and religion. The issue is the integrity of judicial separation as some-one may be able to pay the value placed as fine on harassment, yet a constant state of harassment progresses to treason against United States Condition. This crime of treason happens by the means in which a one person manages a grievance that is filed against some-one else.  
  • @piloteer
    So basically what you’re saying is that unless I start calling everyone white* then I’m racist?

    *an example
    Zombieguy1987
    Sovereignty for Kekistan
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @AmericanFurryBoy

    Huhh???? MmmNo. There is no white race! 
    Zombieguy1987
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    edited March 9
     @MayCaesar

    Science is not interested in "statistics", nor am I. The idea that the human race can be broken down into racial sub-groups is only a social construction. That social construction is called racism. If you can demonstrate the findings of the study are false, I welcome you to do so. If what your arguing is, just because it's a social construction doesn't make it false, and, most people adhere to the idea of different races, I don't dispute that. I'm claiming that "most people" are racists. 
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1595 Pts
    @piloteer

    Pretty sure you are being dishonest right now. Statistics is the primary tool in science. Without statistics, we would have no science aside from abstract mathematics. Statistics is how our theories are proven experimentally.

    Everything is a social construction in some way. One could say, "There are no cats and dogs. There are only animals. Cats and dogs are a social construction, and separating animals into cats and dogs is animalism". Everything except for the conclusion would be correct - and, at the same time, pointless.

    The findings of the study are not false. The interpretation of them is, as I have already explained. You simply dislike the correct interpretation, because you do not personally like the concept of "race". I do not like it either, but it is what it is. I accept scientific facts even when they make me feel bad. I am not afraid of facts, no matter what they say.

    Strictly speaking, there are no 100%-dogs and 100%-cats. Every animal is, on some level, a hybrid of other animals. Nonetheless, nobody is confused when I talk about dogs. Similarly, no one should be confused when I talk about Asian people. There are various contexts in which talking about Asian people would constitute racism, and there are various context in which it would not.

    I can honestly say that physically I am, on average, much more attracted to Asian women, than any other women. It is not a racist statement, and it is a practically helpful statement, because, were I to become interested in dating someone, I would be able to come up with a dating strategy that is likely to match me with the women I physically am attracted to.
    Of course, someone who really dislikes these categories can say that I am both racist (because I prefer Asian people) and sexist (because I prefer women to men) - but they will be wrong. They are free to believe what they want, however.
    Zombieguy1987
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    You are correct. There are no 100% dogs, or cats, or humans. We are ALL genetically related. The primary tool in science is not statistics, it's experiment and observation. Statistics are only the method used to record the findings. Furthermore, the kind of statistics you're referring to are statistics on social norms, not scientific research. We covered this in my sociology debate, and if you look, I'm still unconvinced that sociology is a viable science. I accept that the findings of a study can be subject to interpretation, but if you have an interpretation of the study I posted, then feel free to share. 

    Although your retort was well thought of and you make some good points, in the end, it's shallow. The only reasoning you can use to demonstrate differences in "races" is by visual characteristics. You are arguing that you can make a judgment of a person based on their visual features. The problem with this is, peoples visual assessment of other people also boils over into their judgment of those peoples intellectual, and moral standings, as well as other things like hygiene and socioeconomic status, and even their taste in fashion, or music, and maybe even their political outlooks. I'm not saying you do this, but many people use your formula of visual assessments to make a judgment of an individual, and they believe they can assess all kinds of information based on how the person looks, and dresses, and they treat them in a manner based solely off their visual assessments. That is plain and simply, prejudice. 

    You summed up your whole argument when you said your "physically" attracted to Asian women. Obviously you would need to get to know a person to make a judgment on whether your attracted to them in a way other than physically. Arguing that you're not racist toward Asian women because you're physically attracted to them is not a very convincing argument. Amon Goth was physically attracted to his Jewish maid, but he still thought she was of an inferior race, and she still deserved to die. Again, I'm not saying you're a racist, I'm just saying that people who believe humankind is made up of separate races, are racists. 


  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1595 Pts
    edited March 11
    @piloteer

    You seem to be consistently trying to switch the object of the discussion from whether there are races to how certain people are going to react to that information. That is not relevant to the validity of the discussed argument. I am well aware that many people try to use my reasoning to justify their racist views. Sometimes people use a valid argument to draw erroneous conclusions from it. That does not speak against the argument, however; it speaks against those people.

    I did not talk about making any judgment of a person based on their racial characteristics. I do not know who the person walking towards me on the street is, and their skin color does not provide any useful information. I can make a guess about their certain physical or other characteristics based on statistics (for example, a black person is likely to be able to lift heavier weights, than a white person), and I will be right more times than I will be wrong - but that in no way is related to who they are as a person. Trying to judge someone before getting to know them is pointless and will never work, simply because of how diverse any society is.

    I know who and why I am attracted to, and I never said that race was a determining factor in any way. I simply know what my overall preferences are. Obviously I am not claiming that Asian people are somehow inherently better than other people. Much like I am not claiming that, say, my mother is inherently better than your mother. But I cannot change my individual preferences. And even if I could, why would I?

    Physical attraction is not very high on the priority list in my book either. Who the individual is as a person matters much more. I once spent a few hours hanging out with a geisha in Japan (disclaimer: people often misunderstand what geishas really are; suffice to say it has nothing to do with physical pleasures). It was a very deep spiritual and philosophical experience, and we talked about things that were easily as deep as the best debates on this website. I am fascinated by the Japanese traditional culture, and it is a big factor in me being attracted to Japanese women. What they look like obviously plays a role as well, but it is not a determinant.

    You are trying to convince the wrong person. I do not disagree with anything you are saying, except for the claim that simply recognizing the existence of races is being a racist. By definition, racism is a theory of racial superiority, not racial existence. The claim of the opposite simply goes in line with the modern trend of calling everything racist, sexist and so on, and does not have a rational basis.
    Zombieguy1987
  • piloteer said:
    @AmericanFurryBoy

    Huhh???? MmmNo. There is no white race! 

    Can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

    But, if you're being serious. then ironically, you're being racist by saying white people aren't a race.

    piloteer
    https://www.google.com/search?q=victims+of+religion&safe=active&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=x&ved=0ahukewihu9jugorfahwkmeakhbtib00q_auidigb&biw=1920&bih=963&safe=active

    For the first time since 2009, the Carolina Hurricanes will be playing for the Stanley Cup! 

    Repealing the Second Amendment is the first step to Totalitarianism, and it needs to be prevented to protect our freedom 

    http://www.atheistrepublic.com/
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    If you can refute the findings of the study, then I will concede, until then, I will not back down from my claim that people who believe humankind is made up of separate races, are racists. The only reasoning you seem to be able to muster are ones based on social construction, and visual assessments. Outside of that, you've still not been able to produce any scientific evidence that disputes the findings of the study. You can argue about social attitudes until you're blue in the face, but that doesn't do anything to dispute my argument. My claim was that science says human race is an illusion. That claim is not concerned with social attitudes, it's only concerned with cold, hard facts.

    I think one problem we might be having in this discussion is when I say racism, it might conjure visions of burning crosses. That's not what I'm talking about here at all. I will concede that not everyone who believes that all of humankind is made up of separate races actually believes that some are inferior or superior. In fact, it's likely that most don't. But I won't back down from my claim that those people are racists. The basic idea of my argument is the idea of different races is a social construct that's not based in any scientific findings. So those that believe in distinctive races, are racists, because the science says that's just not true. All the markers that can be used to identify someone as a member of a specific race, are only visual, and those don't actually serve as good indicators of a specific race, they only tell us where that persons ancestral roots lye.

     Whether it's a modern trend to call everything racist, or sexist, doesn't invalidate my argument. Yours is a traditional view point. We were taught about different races, it's something that we thought was true, but now we're learning that those beliefs are rooted in tradition, not science. Some people are obviously going to have a hard time letting go of truths that may no longer be a truth, kinda like the resistance to common core math. Even though it's a better method for teaching math, many parents reject it simply because they weren't taught that way, and they just don't understand it, but in the end, it's foolish to hang on to outdated knowledge just for the sake of keeping with tradition. However "trendy" my argument may be, it's still a valid point, and you've yet to discredit the study I posted.

    You are incorrect about the definition of racism, it absolutely does mean that recognition of the existence of separate races is racism. Racism does not have to be a belief that one race is superior or inferior to others. Just adhering to the idea that all of humankind is made up of separate races IS racism. Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race". Obviously racism is thought to have connotations of inferiority or superiority, but it doesn't necessarily need to have those things in place to be racism. 

    It's worth noting that you claimed to not make a judgment of a person based on their racial characteristics, but in the very same paragraph, you go on to do just that. You are making a judgment of a person based on their skin color and concluded  that if it's a black person, they can probably lift heavier weights than a white person. Whether that's a true statement or not, or whether that's a good judgment or not, it's irrelevant. You've still made a judgment of a person based on their "racial" characteristics. Whether it's a flattering judgment or not, it's still a judgment, based on the visual characteristics of that person.  




  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1075 Pts
    If we're all one race, then there's no such thing as racism.
    Zombieguy1987
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1595 Pts
    @piloteer

    It seems like you are purposefully ignoring my point, reiterating the same claims again and again which I have already addressed. Let me provide a summary of what I have already said, and what you have not addressed.

    1. Like I said, it is not the findings of the study that are erroneous, it is your interpretation of those findings. Science does recognise the existence of races. It also recognises that races are not discrete, and rather are a continuum, which is what the study you linked proves.
    2. Races are not a social construct. Certain social definitions of races can be, but I am not talking about those definitions.
    3. Like I said, different races have different statistical distributions of various traits. That is a fact, and you can google a lot of studies studying those distributions. That is a fact, and it is not my fault that this fact is politically inconvenient.
    4. I will just link this definition here: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
    5. No, I am not making a judgment by stating statistical facts. I do not know anything about this particular black person. I know what that person is more likely to be like in certain regards statistically, but there is enough diversity to make any actual predictions irrelevant. I have met enough outliers in all regards in all possible groups of people to know better than to judge anyone before I get to know them personally.

    People are afraid of the concept of races, because that concept was used to justify a lot of atrocities over the course of human history. Yet it is not the concept they should be afraid of; it is those atrocities.

    I am not afraid of races. That is why I never talk about them, other than in debates about races. Much like I never talk about abortions outside of discussions on abortions, or about religion outside religious discussions. These topics really have no relevance outside scientific and philosophical domains.
    Zombieguy1987
  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @MayCaesar

    rac·ism
    /ˈrāˌsizəm/
    noun
    1. prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
      "a program to combat racism"
      synonyms:racial discrimination, racialism, racial prejudice/bigotry, xenophobia, chauvinism, bigotry, bias, intolerance; More
      • the belief that  members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
        "theories of racism"

    If we look at the second definition of racism, it clearly says that "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race". It goes on to say "especially to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race", but it doesn't say it is limited to the idea of superiority or inferiority. It is plain for all to see. Just associating specific characteristics or abilities to a "race" is indeed racism. So, if we consider someones skin color to be a characteristic (which we do), and we associate that characteristic with a specific "race", than that is racim. Just the recognition of specific races is racism. 

    In what other manner can race be verified beside a social manner? Exactly what statistics can you provide that demonstrates racial differences rather than regional, political, and socioeconomic differences? Are you going to say that people who live in South America are statistically more likely to eat coconut, so they can be distinguished as a specific race? You can't use statistics without using visual characteristics to associate the stats with a specific race. 

    I'm starting to think either you didn't read the study I posted, or you seriously misinterpreted it. One thing the study shows is all variations that we associate with race can be traced back to two specific groups in Africa. That means that any discerning characteristics that are associated with "race", can all be found in Africa. We are ALL African. It also says that Africa has the most diverse genetic makeup of all the continents. The genetic makeup of Africa (as a continent) is more diverse than all of the rest of the worlds genetic makeup combined. In terms of genetics, the only conceivable definitive distinctions that could be considered to be "racial distinctions", would take place within the continent of Africa itself. 


  • piloteerpiloteer 272 Pts
    @CYDdharta

    People who believe there are separate distinctions of race, are racists. 
    Zombieguy1987
  • CYDdhartaCYDdharta 1075 Pts
    piloteer said:
    @CYDdharta

    People who believe there are separate distinctions of race, are racists. 

    You just posted the definition of racism, you know you're wrong.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 1595 Pts
    @piloteer

    That is why I talked about statistical differences, not inherent differences applying to every single person exhibiting traits of a specific race. There are Black people in Africa, some of which do not have black skin, such as albino people. The skin color is a statistically significant trait, but it is not a trait that defines a race in any way.

    There is a strong difference between talking about statistical differences between different races, and individual differences applying to each member of the race. The latter, indeed, can be described as a racism. The former - not by the definition you yourself provided.

    The specific differences I have mentioned a few times already. And even you yourself did. I do not think you will deny that most Black people have black skin. Or that most Asian people have lower height than most White people. There are more profound differences not seen to the naked eye, such as the ability to digest various nutritients, but let us not go in the details.

    Yes, every person is African, to some extent. Like I said, "race" is a continuum, not a discrete property. It does not mean "race" does not exist, however. Just like gender: every single individual ever studied has exhibited both male and female traits - yet we are pretty clear on what exactly we mean when we call a particular person male or female. I am male, and even though I am not 100% male (no one is), it is still reasonable to call me a male.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 DebateIsland.com, All rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch