When it comes to top performance, black people seem to excel in many pro sports such as boxing, bball, running, while there are no black Nobel laureates in science and only three chess grandmasters. Environment only or maybe inherent differences?
The difference between persons with different skin pigment is almost none existent. We are all humans. A white person living next to you may be more distantly related to you than a black person living on the other side. Environment is what makes one different.
It's the roots aspect, floundering in the jungles while others lived in an advanced world. They hadn't any books or machines and didn't even have ships. The elders of tribes passed down hunting techniques. They were the slowest evolving race on the planet. I'm sure there are reasons for that but it is what it is.
I'm still trying to figure out why some are still wearing pants down low with their underwear showing, what is that?
Most of the Nobel winners are Jewish while only a small fraction are Black and Muslim and they are not recognized as much for science.
I still don't see why Obama received one.
How about a bad measurement? For example, Wangari Maathai was a scientist who won the Nobel Prize for peace because her sustainable environmental practices were considered a boon for fostering democracy and peace.
I personally think that it's more concerning that out of more than 800 people who've been awarded the Nobel - in any subject - only 15 have been black. That's less than 2%.
Mainly environment (upbringing, culture, opportunities) but I cannot exclude some possible inherent differences though not huge. Most people of any race aren't material for such excellence.
Having studied this pretty extensively in an anthropological sense, and knowing an above average amount about genetics, I have seen no evidence of a genetic cause and have seen a traceable path to this point supporting it being environmentally induced.
I it rather lengthy for here, and I do not expect people to take my word for it, but the primary causes seem to be:
A sort of cultural disenfranchisement, an eagerness for a unique culture and strong sense of racial identity in general, and a willingness to adapt by adopting concepts that have been proposed as soothing the first thing and supporting the second.
This is, of course, only speaking generally, and does not cover the entire black experience.
That's interesting.
Would you say claims like "blacks on average have 20% more muscle mass than whites" and such that crop up now and then are definitely false?
No, that seems valid. In relation to physical build there are certain racial differences. But there's not much more to it that physical build, skin pigmentation and certain immune system aspects.
It's in regard to the other aspect mentioned, the mental aspect, I've seen no proof it's genetic.
In fact, while there are genes that can inhibit neural development, the vast majority of evidence I've seen so far points to it being much more related to environment. (It seems the strongest bond is with nurturing received from age 0-4, which would be socially influenced.)
Just to be clear, you're talking about blacks in America when you make your muscle mass statement. And there was historical rationale for selectively breeding the largest, strongest slaves possible. And when you systematically manipulate a gene pool while making an expansion of said gene pool a near blasphemy for so long, it has long-term effects.
As conservatives often argue, we actually find a strong link between black crime and deteriorating family units.
That is to say, the environmental factor of not having a father/mother or both is the most predictive variable for a life of crime. This applies across all ethnicities in America and just happens to be especially pervasive amongst black families--likely because of centuries of discrimination and selective breeding.
As true as all of this may be, I have to concede that we cannot and should not conclude that black people are not cognitively disadvantaged because we don't want to be accused of racism.
I suspect that black people do have relative cognitive deficiencies--for no fault of their own. For one, we already know that poverty modifies the brain, negatively. That's not racial, but it exists.
It's just that no scientist wants to be accused of racism and therefore these studies, which could provide quantifiable evidence for cognitive problems, are never conducted.
I disagree on a few points, but am at work at the moment
In short, specifying black crime in the opening statement seems unnecessary to the truth of the statement.
Second, I don't think the prevalence in inner-city, and or poverty-set black families of having a deteriorated family structure is related at all to the selective breeding in the time of slavery and only partially the result of discrimination. More so I believe it has to do with the current state of "black culture" which I put in quotes because I most if it is not black, of origin, and much was adopted between the 60s and 80s during a period where a unique cultural identity was (quite understandably) craved.
I do agree, though, that the family>crime trend is there regardless of ethnicity, and that I was I think it in inaccurate to state that there is an intellectual deficiency in blacks, since it's neither genetically based nor universal.
Just to clarify, I only specified "black crime" because that is the typical conservative argument. I agree with you that it is unnecessary to the argument, but the purpose of that specification was to validate part of the typical conservative argument, which has some truth to it.
On another note, I wasn't trying to draw a correlation between selective breeding and deteriorating black families. I do agree that those are two distinct issues that may or may kot be linked pending empirical review.
Show of Hands
Comments: Add Comment