How the Irish Prove Racism Against Muslims Exist

Started by Shiranu, October 13, 2017, 09:26:47 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Hydra009

#195
Quote from: Shiranu on February 05, 2018, 01:37:02 PMThe modern idea of race was heavily (and I don't use that word lightly) pushed by scientists who were just discovering the fields of genetics and anthropology. The idea of race as a genetic thing, or that there are "superior" races, or that the inferior races are inherently less intelligent, more violent, etc. (the racist rhetoric we use today) was almost completely and exclusively coined by scientists. Thus racism as we understand it now is largely a product of science... or rather, how we understand it is a product of science.
"Scientific" racism is about as scientific as creationism or phrenology, though.

Sure, some scientists dabbled in it, but the concept itself isn't rooted in actual science - racists just used the scientific jargon of the day to provide an air of rationality and respectability to a pre-existing irrational fear/hatred of tribal outgroups.

Baruch

All science before 20,000 AD ... is hopelessly primitive ape turd throwing.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Draconic Aiur

Quote from: Shiranu on February 05, 2018, 09:01:17 PM
Except science "proved" racism (until it "disproved" it by changing it's stance on if race even exists) for several hundred years. Race as we think of it is a scientific construct proposed during the 17th century; before then, it meant people who spoke a common tongue or shared nationalistic values. When we speak of racists, we both know damn well that is not the standard that is being used.

The first scientific race was proposed by Francois Bernier in 1684, and shortly after everyone jumped on that bandwagon for several hundred years.

European. Asian. Native American. African. When we think of race, this is what we think of, and the first person to propose these categories existed was a certain Carl Linnaeus (who proposed that Europeans were, "hard working, industrious, intelligent" while Africans were "lazy, incompetent and careless"). This wasn't opinion; this was published scientific "fact" that was thought as fact for centuries. Thomas Jefferson "studied" whites and blacks and concluded that Europeans were scientifically smarter than Africans, who were both less intelligent and had biological sexual impulses that made them lose control of themselves (I.E. the black guy comin' to rape your white women). Again, this was all done "scientifically".

Yes, science is a tool; and it was a tool that was used for very, very horrible things. It's like saying science had nothing to do with Wirth's experiments on Jews and prisoners... it was done because these were some absolutely disgusting monsters... but it wasn't done just to torture the Jews, it was done to research and learn. It was science taken to an unethical extreme (something that happens to this day and commonly).

When I say science, I don't mean "science" the field but "science" the scientists & the culture that surrounds it and composes it, and I think that is rather common sense to know which one is being referred to if you are a native English speaker.

The German Nazis researched the Jews hereditary traits that were negative due to in breeding. True they used science to do terrible things and thus science down that path looked robot like, but what I'm explaining to you is it was all done with religious notions that the Aryan "race" was Superior. Like many before them the ideal of superiority or ignorance created race not anything physical, biological, or chemical. Religion was used as a science once which we know isn't scientifically at all, so sir you are adding salt to a pepper box.

Baruch

In the religion of scientism, the scientists are just people, but the science is immaculate conception.  And the laity (non-scientists) are legitimately clueless even more than a Polish person at a Latin mass ... so if the laity misinterpret then that isn't science's fault ... because science is perfect.

This is schizoid, to separate a subject from the practitioners, as if they are unrelated (per Plato).  Can y'all see how the inerrancy and infallibility idea came out of Greek philosophy (proto-science), into theology?
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.


Baruch

Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Hakurei Reimu

Shinaru, please keep in mind that when race was invented, a scientist could seriously describe himself as a creationist, and indeed, creationism was the only way to explain the diversity of life back then. When you believe that the entirety of the human race descended from a dozen or so salty dogs stepping off the Ark onto a depopulated post-diluvian Earth, then it only makes sense that the different sons of Noah could develop into distinct "races."

The theory of races was in trouble ever since Darwin predicted that Africa was the origin of humanity, and only multiplied as paleontology and archeology placed humans in the exact right places to confirm this, and finally genetic sequencing of human DNA and the subsequent tracking of mitocondrial and Y chromasomal DNA revealed our true pedigree and lay in stark black and white for all to see that the only way races could be preserved was to make it a mockery of the rest of phylogenetics.

Speaking of which, phylogenetics had at much the same time started ditching the Linean taxonomy, as that same genetic analysis had revealed that some creatures we thought were related to others (via taxonomy) were revealed to not be related, and others not thought to be related were actually more. While the tree of life did not change all that much on the large scale, the revisions showed that the Linean types (Kingdom, Phylum, Class, etc.) was no longer tenable.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Baruch

Like all human inventions, like boundaries on the globe ... they are arbitrary human creations ... with more or less plausibility depending on which time period we are speaking of.  Humans know nothing, except the content of their own delusions.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Cavebear

Quote from: Baruch on February 06, 2018, 07:08:57 PM
Like all human inventions, like boundaries on the globe ... they are arbitrary human creations ... with more or less plausibility depending on which time period we are speaking of.  Humans know nothing, except the content of their own delusions.

We are all variations of our Africa ancestors.  I have my hair and eye color due to adaptions to lower latitude sunlight.  Africans, southern Asians, and Native Australians have their due to more sunlight.  I don't understand why that ever makes a difference.

On the other hand, culture does,
Atheist born, atheist bred.  And when I die, atheist dead!