The evolution of race - how evolution debunks racism

Koan

Rookie
Joined
May 2, 2018
Messages
9
Reaction score
2
Points
1



Science reveals that genetic diversity leads to better offspring, who are better able to adapt to new environments.

Conversely, we see that a lack of genetic diversity results in genetically inferior offspring. This is why we avoid practicing incest, for example. And, indeed, if one wanted to preserve homogeneity as much as possible, then practicing incest would be the way to do it.

Based on these facts, it seems that science has thoroughly debunked racism, and shown that mixing races leads to superior offspring. Racism, like incest, is archaic and holds back the evolution of the species.

Genetic diversity is crucial for the evolution of species. It allows for the development of new traits and adaptations that enable organisms to survive in changing environments. When a population or species has low genetic diversity, it is more susceptible to disease, environmental changes, and other threats. In contrast, a population with high genetic diversity is more resilient and has a greater chance of survival.
 
Even if we could force every child today to be born from a mixed marriage, people would still
find some racial issue to ***** about.
 



Science reveals that genetic diversity leads to better offspring, who are better able to adapt to new environments.

Conversely, we see that a lack of genetic diversity results in genetically inferior offspring. This is why we avoid practicing incest, for example. And, indeed, if one wanted to preserve homogeneity as much as possible, then practicing incest would be the way to do it.

Based on these facts, it seems that science has thoroughly debunked racism, and shown that mixing races leads to superior offspring. Racism, like incest, is archaic and holds back the evolution of the species.

Genetic diversity is crucial for the evolution of species. It allows for the development of new traits and adaptations that enable organisms to survive in changing environments. When a population or species has low genetic diversity, it is more susceptible to disease, environmental changes, and other threats. In contrast, a population with high genetic diversity is more resilient and has a greater chance of survival.
Oh dear, someone questions the father of evolutionary theory, Charles Darwin. Are you a science denier?

Darwin believed in white supremacy, he offers a biological explanation for it, namely that white people are further evolved. He writes that the “western nations of Europe … now so immeasurably surpass their former savage progenitors and stand at the summit of civilization” (178). Darwin imagines that Europeans are more advanced versions of the rest of the world. As previously mentioned, this purported superiority justified to Darwin the domination of inferior races by Europeans. As white Europeans “exterminate and replace” the world’s “savage races,” and as great apes go extinct, Darwin says that the gap between civilized man and his closest evolutionary ancestor will widen. The gap will eventually be between civilized man “and some ape as low as a baboon, instead of as at present between the negro or Australian and the gorilla” (201). Read that last line again if you missed it: Darwin’s theory claims that Africans and Australians are more closely related to apes than Europeans are. The spectrum of organisms is a hierarchy here, with white Europeans at the top and apes at the bottom. In Darwin’s theory, colored people fall somewhere in between. Modern human is essentially restricted only to white Europeans, with all other races viewed as somehow sub-human.
 



Science reveals that genetic diversity leads to better offspring, who are better able to adapt to new environments.

Conversely, we see that a lack of genetic diversity results in genetically inferior offspring. This is why we avoid practicing incest, for example. And, indeed, if one wanted to preserve homogeneity as much as possible, then practicing incest would be the way to do it.

Based on these facts, it seems that science has thoroughly debunked racism, and shown that mixing races leads to superior offspring. Racism, like incest, is archaic and holds back the evolution of the species.

Genetic diversity is crucial for the evolution of species. It allows for the development of new traits and adaptations that enable organisms to survive in changing environments. When a population or species has low genetic diversity, it is more susceptible to disease, environmental changes, and other threats. In contrast, a population with high genetic diversity is more resilient and has a greater chance of survival.
Heterosis.
 



Science reveals that genetic diversity leads to better offspring, who are better able to adapt to new environments.

Conversely, we see that a lack of genetic diversity results in genetically inferior offspring. This is why we avoid practicing incest, for example. And, indeed, if one wanted to preserve homogeneity as much as possible, then practicing incest would be the way to do it.

Based on these facts, it seems that science has thoroughly debunked racism, and shown that mixing races leads to superior offspring. Racism, like incest, is archaic and holds back the evolution of the species.

Genetic diversity is crucial for the evolution of species. It allows for the development of new traits and adaptations that enable organisms to survive in changing environments. When a population or species has low genetic diversity, it is more susceptible to disease, environmental changes, and other threats. In contrast, a population with high genetic diversity is more resilient and has a greater chance of survival.
Experiences during development create the personality genes play a minor role
 



Science reveals that genetic diversity leads to better offspring, who are better able to adapt to new environments.

Conversely, we see that a lack of genetic diversity results in genetically inferior offspring. This is why we avoid practicing incest, for example. And, indeed, if one wanted to preserve homogeneity as much as possible, then practicing incest would be the way to do it.

Based on these facts, it seems that science has thoroughly debunked racism, and shown that mixing races leads to superior offspring. Racism, like incest, is archaic and holds back the evolution of the species.

Genetic diversity is crucial for the evolution of species. It allows for the development of new traits and adaptations that enable organisms to survive in changing environments. When a population or species has low genetic diversity, it is more susceptible to disease, environmental changes, and other threats. In contrast, a population with high genetic diversity is more resilient and has a greater chance of survival.

What was discovered by the study that supports your claim?


(you know, that I have to ask that, instead of you just presenting it, is kind of...not good)
 



Science reveals that genetic diversity leads to better offspring, who are better able to adapt to new environments.

Conversely, we see that a lack of genetic diversity results in genetically inferior offspring. This is why we avoid practicing incest, for example. And, indeed, if one wanted to preserve homogeneity as much as possible, then practicing incest would be the way to do it.

Based on these facts, it seems that science has thoroughly debunked racism, and shown that mixing races leads to superior offspring. Racism, like incest, is archaic and holds back the evolution of the species.

Genetic diversity is crucial for the evolution of species. It allows for the development of new traits and adaptations that enable organisms to survive in changing environments. When a population or species has low genetic diversity, it is more susceptible to disease, environmental changes, and other threats. In contrast, a population with high genetic diversity is more resilient and has a greater chance of survival.
You seem to think that if man were all "one color" the hate will stop.

Nothing could be further from the truth.

Tell that to the Jew in Europe who had to wear special garb in order to be able to visually spot their targeted hate group on site because, without it, they looked like everyone else and then were treated like everyone else.
 
What was discovered by the study that supports your claim?


(you know, that I have to ask that, instead of you just presenting it, is kind of...not good)
Every model of human development places experiences as more important than genes. There are also genes that only turn on when triggered by experiences. This is how we adapt to an envir0nmentthats changing. Social connections are the main cause of who we are
 
Every model of human development places experiences as more important than genes. There are also genes that only turn on when triggered by experiences. This is how we adapt to an envir0nmentthats changing. Social connections are the main cause of who we are

The op posted a study, implying that the study found something supports his assertion.


I'm willing to look at what the study found. But he doesn't even tell us in his op.


That was kind of dumb.


If he wants to discuss it, post the findings.
 
Actually, that’s not true. Many personality traits, such as introversion and conscientiousness, are largely inherited.
Every model of development from Adler to Erikson places experiences as far more important then genes. We also have the science of epigenetics that explains that genes are turned on by experiences.
 
Every model of development from Adler to Erikson places experiences as far more important then genes. We also have the science of epigenetics that explains that genes are turned on by experiences.
I’d hardly say “far more important.” In fact, studies show personality to be heritable by 30% to 60% - which means some traits are MOSTLY inherited.

That’s not to say that personalities can’t be nurtured, and that one shouldn’t try to work with a shy kid to help him or her develop more confidence. But to ignore the significant impact of genes is just plain wrong.

 
I’d hardly say “far more important.” In fact, studies show personality to be heritable by 30% to 60% - which means some traits are MOSTLY inherited.

That’s not to say that personalities can’t be nurtured, and that one shouldn’t try to work with a shy kid to help him or her develop more confidence. But to ignore the significant impact of genes is just plain wrong.

What studies? I have a graduate degree in psychology and the models we use are based on experiences during critical periods of development. Parenting is everything

Erikson's 8 stages of psychosocial development outline how personality develops through a series of conflicts, or crises, from infancy to old age. Successfully resolving each crisis leads to the development of a psychological strength. The stages are: Trust vs. Mistrust, Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt, Initiative vs. Guilt, Industry vs. Inferiority, Identity vs. Role Confusion, Intimacy vs. Isolation, Generativity vs. Stagnation, and Integrity vs. Despair.
 
What studies? I have a graduate degree in psychology and the models we use are based on experiences during critical periods of development. Parenting is everything

Erikson's 8 stages of psychosocial development outline how personality develops through a series of conflicts, or crises, from infancy to old age. Successfully resolving each crisis leads to the development of a psychological strength. The stages are: Trust vs. Mistrust, Autonomy vs. Shame and Doubt, Initiative vs. Guilt, Industry vs. Inferiority, Identity vs. Role Confusion, Intimacy vs. Isolation, Generativity vs. Stagnation, and Integrity vs. Despair.
Parenting is “everything”?

There’s long been discussions of nature vs. nurture, and if you are so determined that genes do not have an impact on personality, then your mind is made up and I won’t waste my time.
 
Parenting is “everything”?

There’s long been discussions of nature vs. nurture, and if you are so determined that genes do not have an impact on personality, then your mind is made up and I won’t waste my time.
You need to turn on one of his genes to open that mind of his.

:auiqs.jpg:
 
Parenting is “everything”?

There’s long been discussions of nature vs. nurture, and if you are so determined that genes do not have an impact on personality, then your mind is made up and I won’t waste my time.
Genes are 30% experiences are 70%. When did you get your degree in psychology. Do you know what epigenetics is?
Several prominent models and theories attempt to explain human development, each offering a unique perspective on how individuals grow and change throughout their lives. Key models include Piaget's Cognitive Development, Erikson's Psychosocial Development, Freud's Psychosexual Development, Bowlby's Attachment Theory, Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory, and Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory. These frameworks highlight different aspects of development, such as cognitive abilities, social interactions, emotional well-being, and the influence of various environmental factors.

Here's a more detailed look at some of these models:
1. Piaget's Cognitive Development: This theory focuses on how children's thinking and problem-solving abilities develop in distinct stages.

2. Erikson's Psychosocial Development: This model emphasizes the impact of social interactions and relationships on personality development across the lifespan. It proposes eight stages, each characterized by a specific psychosocial crisis that individuals must resolve.

3. Freud's Psychosexual Development: This theory suggests that personality develops through a series of psychosexual stages, each focused on a different erogenous zone. While influential, it has been criticized for its lack of empirical support.

4. Bowlby's Attachment Theory: This theory emphasizes the importance of early childhood attachments for social and emotional development. Secure attachments provide a foundation for healthy relationships later in life.

5. Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory: This model highlights the role of observational learning, imitation, and modeling in shaping behavior. It also emphasizes self-efficacy, or the belief in one's ability to succeed.

6. Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory: This model emphasizes the multiple levels of influence that environment has on development, including the microsystem (immediate environment), mesosystem (connections between microsystems), exosystem (social settings), and macrosystem (cultural values).

7. Other Models: Other notable theories include Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory, which emphasizes the role of social interaction and culture in cognitive development. Additionally, behaviorism, with its focus on reinforcement and punishment, provides another lens through which to view human development.

These various models and theories offer valuable frameworks for understanding the complexities of human development. By considering these different perspectives, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of how individuals grow, learn, and adapt throughout their lives.


  • Theories of Human Development - Sage Publishing
    This chapter will briefly describe the seven major theoretical perspectives or theories on human development: Maturationist Theory...
    1755436258395.webp

    Sage Publishing

    1755436258401.webp


  • The 7 Most Influential Child Developmental Theories
    Jan 27, 2025 — Others are known as mini-theories; they instead focus only on a fairly limited aspect of development such as cognitiv...
    1755436258407.webp

    Verywell Mind

    1755436258413.webp


  • Educational Implications That Arise From Differing Models of Human ...
    While not an exhaustive account, we sketch out three models of human development, the so-called autonomous self (AS), processual s...
    1755436258418.webp

    Frontiers

    1755436258424.webp


  • Show all
 
15th post
Genes are 30% experiences are 70%. When did you get your degree in psychology. Do you know what epigenetics is?
Several prominent models and theories attempt to explain human development, each offering a unique perspective on how individuals grow and change throughout their lives. Key models include Piaget's Cognitive Development, Erikson's Psychosocial Development, Freud's Psychosexual Development, Bowlby's Attachment Theory, Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory, and Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory. These frameworks highlight different aspects of development, such as cognitive abilities, social interactions, emotional well-being, and the influence of various environmental factors.

Here's a more detailed look at some of these models:
1. Piaget's Cognitive Development: This theory focuses on how children's thinking and problem-solving abilities develop in distinct stages.

2. Erikson's Psychosocial Development: This model emphasizes the impact of social interactions and relationships on personality development across the lifespan. It proposes eight stages, each characterized by a specific psychosocial crisis that individuals must resolve.

3. Freud's Psychosexual Development: This theory suggests that personality develops through a series of psychosexual stages, each focused on a different erogenous zone. While influential, it has been criticized for its lack of empirical support.

4. Bowlby's Attachment Theory: This theory emphasizes the importance of early childhood attachments for social and emotional development. Secure attachments provide a foundation for healthy relationships later in life.

5. Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory: This model highlights the role of observational learning, imitation, and modeling in shaping behavior. It also emphasizes self-efficacy, or the belief in one's ability to succeed.

6. Bronfenbrenner's Ecological Systems Theory: This model emphasizes the multiple levels of influence that environment has on development, including the microsystem (immediate environment), mesosystem (connections between microsystems), exosystem (social settings), and macrosystem (cultural values).

7. Other Models: Other notable theories include Vygotsky's Sociocultural Theory, which emphasizes the role of social interaction and culture in cognitive development. Additionally, behaviorism, with its focus on reinforcement and punishment, provides another lens through which to view human development.

These various models and theories offer valuable frameworks for understanding the complexities of human development. By considering these different perspectives, we can gain a more comprehensive understanding of how individuals grow, learn, and adapt throughout their lives.


  • Theories of Human Development - Sage Publishing
    This chapter will briefly describe the seven major theoretical perspectives or theories on human development: Maturationist Theory...
    View attachment 1150522
    Sage Publishing

    View attachment 1150523

  • The 7 Most Influential Child Developmental Theories
    Jan 27, 2025 — Others are known as mini-theories; they instead focus only on a fairly limited aspect of development such as cognitiv...
    View attachment 1150527
    Verywell Mind

    View attachment 1150524

  • Educational Implications That Arise From Differing Models of Human ...
    While not an exhaustive account, we sketch out three models of human development, the so-called autonomous self (AS), processual s...
    View attachment 1150525
    Frontiers

    View attachment 1150526

  • Show all
Oh, so now you ADMIT that genes are 30%? (That’s the lowest end of estimates, btw.) A second ago you just said parenting was 100%.

And psychologists who discount the role of genes and blame parents for everything do a lot of harm. Some kids are naturally more shy, others more outgoing.

When I was two, my parents couldn’t even lower me into the ocean a few feet from shore to where my toes touched the water without my screaming. My sister, at the same age, went running full-steam ahead right into the tide with my parents running after her to stop her. You think we were treated differently? Nope. We were born with different natures.

And your holier-than-thou arrogance is jumping off the page.
 
Oh, so now you ADMIT that genes are 30%? (That’s the lowest end of estimates, btw.) A second ago you just said parenting was 100%.

And psychologists who discount the role of genes and blame parents for everything do a lot of harm. Some kids are naturally more shy, others more outgoing.

When I was two, my parents couldn’t even lower me into the ocean a few feet from shore to where my toes touched the water without my screaming. My sister, at the same age, went running full-steam ahead right into the tide with my parents running after her to stop her. You think we were treated differently? Nope. We were born with different natures.

And your holier-than-thou arrogance is jumping off the page.
Its a combination of both but genes are the least significant in personality development. Experiences determine who you are. Then your behavior defines who you are. If genes were the main cause of personality we couldnt adapt to a life thats always changing
 
Its a combination of both but genes are the least significant in personality development. Experiences determine who you are. Then your behavior defines who you are. If genes were the main cause of personality we couldnt adapt to a life thats always changing
Really, so is it your position that experience is what turns people into being gay or trans?
 
Really, so is it your position that experience is what turns people into being gay or trans?
Trans is a mental illness caused by a premorbid personality disorder or emotional disturbance. So yes thats experience and socially transmitted.
Gay is normal and only partly genetic. Twin studies prove that.
Identical twins are both gay 52 % of the time. fraternal twins 43% non twin siblings 23 %. Sp we can deduce that Identical twins are not 100% both gay there is another factor. We also see as the genes become less identical the incandesce drops. Which proves its both gens and the experience that trigger homosexuality
 
Back
Top Bottom