Race War

[Einherjar86]

@Ein: Since science currently can neither validate nor invalidate that claim, your opinion is as good as mine.

I realize that; but for the time being, I think it's best to defer to Ockham's razor.

EDIT: or, at least, to defer to concrete circumstances/constructions, rather than speculate about unknowns.

 

[Dak]

I think originally we were discussing rather or not jokes based on stereotypes are racist.

 

[skeptik]

Pat, I actually disagree with you there. I do think that our genes do play a role in helping to predetermine what type of personality one may be inclined to develope. One's environment helps to piece out those predispositions into a reality. Otherwise I wouldn't think there would be so many differences between the similarities of fraternal twins vs identical twins, for example. We also accept that some people are born homosexual or with an inaccurate gender identity. I won't say more on this subject though because my readings on the matter are all from at least 4 years ago and I wouldn't have any resources immediately at hand to back up my statements.

 

[Einherjar86]

I'd have to do more reading on the subject as well; however, I do want to contend a specific point.

I actually don't believe that people are born homosexual; however,I also don't believe that people are born heterosexual. I believe that people are born with libidinal sexual energy that gets channeled toward chosen objects, and that those objects are a result of historical conditions beyond the effects of genes. It could even be random, but I don't think we can predict sexuality based on a genome.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

^ Wut?

I disagree that genes have no effect on personality. They are not a determining factor, but considering that certain types of mental illness can be hereditary goes to show that genetics play at least a small part in personality.

 

[Draehl]

I must be part Asian then Vimana.

 

[waif]

I'd have to do more reading on the subject as well; however, I do want to contend a specific point.

I actually don't believe that people are born homosexual; however,I also don't believe that people are born heterosexual. I believe that people are born with libidinal sexual energy that gets channeled toward chosen objects, and that those objects are a result of historical conditions beyond the effects of genes. It could even be random, but I don't think we can predict sexuality based on a genome.

It's not black and white. You can't be born "with" alcoholism. You can however, be born with a predisposition towards alcoholism. Evidence suggests it's the same with sexuality. There's clearly some degree of genetic influence (for example, a study of fruit flies showed that the nephews of gay fruit flies were more likely to be gay, and yes there is a very easy joke about fruit flies in there), but it's definitely not 100%.

Pat, I actually disagree with you there. I do think that our genes do play a role in helping to predetermine what type of personality one may be inclined to develope. One's environment helps to piece out those predispositions into a reality. Otherwise I wouldn't think there would be so many differences between the similarities of fraternal twins vs identical twins, for example.

I took a course on Personality last year and my reading pretty much backs this up. Genes predispose you towards shit and then your environment pushes you the rest of the way.

And there can be some really crazy similarities. There was one pair of identical twins raised apart who married first and second wives with the same names, had kids with the same names, drove the same cars, drank the same beer, had the same jobs and wore the same clothes.

 

[Vimana]

I must be part Asian then Vimana.

What? For the standards on what's fat?

And there can be some really crazy similarities. There was one pair of identical twins raised apart who married first and second wives with the same names, had kids with the same names, drove the same cars, drank the same beer, had the same jobs and wore the same clothes.

I saw something like that in sociology and it was actually a hoax. Various twin studies have been admitted hoaxes.

 

[Draehl]

What? For the standards on what's fat?

I saw something like that in sociology and it was actually a hoax. Various twin studies have been admitted hoaxes.

Yep and Yep.

 

[Vimana]

It's a bit different because the average person's body mass in Asia creates the standard for the whole people. It's not the same for one in a country where that is not the case ending up developing the standard.

 

[Dak]

What causes racism in America, 2:18 especially.:



The back half of the video is one of the many reasons to hate the state.

 

[Saparmurat_Niyazov]

You follow the capitalism page on FB too?

 

[Dak]

Nah, I got it from a link from a group of (mostly) like minded individuals. Probably where they got it though.

 

[Einherjar86]

^ Wut?

"Homosexuality" and "heterosexuality" are socially created terms that are applied to human sexuality. Human sexuality, in fact, is not inherently homo- or hetero-. Object cathexis can be altered by social determinants (education, religion, familial pressures, etc.), but it's midleading to apply terms like "homosexual" to a human being before it's even born.

It's not black and white. You can't be born "with" alcoholism. You can however, be born with a predisposition towards alcoholism. Evidence suggests it's the same with sexuality. There's clearly some degree of genetic influence (for example, a study of fruit flies showed that the nephews of gay fruit flies were more likely to be gay, and yes there is a very easy joke about fruit flies in there), but it's definitely not 100%.

Alcoholism is very different from sexuality. Alcoholism has measurable biological effects on the body; addiction, for instance, we know can be passed on to unborn fetuses.

This is the only way, in my opinion, someone can be born with a predisposition toward something like alcoholism. People aren't born with a natural inclination toward dependence.

 

[waif]

That's just, like, your opinion, man.

Unfortunately, it's factually wrong.
http://www.medicinenet.com/script/main/art.asp?articlekey=26119

Genes clearly do contribute to alcoholism.

http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa60.htm

Research has shown conclusively that familial transmission of alcoholism risk is at least in part genetic and not just the result of family environment (1).

NEVER ARGUE WITH A FIRST-YEAR PSYCH STUDENT

 

[Dak]

You're majoring in psychology WAIF?

 

[damnromulans]

Some belligerent black guy yelled at me and called me a stupid Chinese girl on the street last night. First ching chong incident since repatriation

 

[Einherjar86]

EDIT: @InFlames

I didn't know you're a psych student. That's awesome.

And all of this is just my opinion; but I don't think the links you posted necessarily disprove what I was trying to say.

I acknowledged that familial transmission can certainly contribute to increased risk of alcoholism or alcohol dependency; what I don't believe is that there are "blank slate" genes out there (or whatever) that incline people toward alcoholism. Those studies seemed to suggest that certain families were at risk due to previous behavior of their ancestors (unless I read them too fast; I'm cooking and typing).

Sexuality, I personally feel, is an entirely socially determined phenomenon. All human beings possess sexual energy, yes; but I don't believe there's a "homosexual" gene (I'm drawing on Freud's Three Essays on Sexuality for this, by the way).

 

[Dak]

Generally speaking, excluding a small base of devoted fans, modern psychologists do not take Freud seriously anymore.
If I were to pursue a four year degree again, psychology would be in my top 3 choices.

 

[Einherjar86]

Generally speaking, excluding a small base of devoted fans, modern psychologists do not take Freud seriously anymore.

I know. It's unfortunate.