|
Post by jonbain on Aug 1, 2021 19:08:42 GMT
As for my first assertion, can anyone here PROVE that genetics is anything more than pseudo-science?
In specific all the racial classification going on,
which to me simply looks like the sophistry of racism.
Is there an experiment I can actually do that has some meaningful use here?
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Aug 6, 2021 18:57:58 GMT
I think I agree with you. Unfortunatly, I don't know well this disciple. All I know about it is the school, and reading for some Philosophy of Science books, plus, maybe, the critics of some notions in it by Rudolph Carnap (who criticized a person named Drisch, and that that person wanted to use the notion "entelechy" in the science, while no strictly defining it). I read about a monk Mendel who firstly discovered the rules of the selection. On what I disagree with genetics. I think for me - not a biologist or a chemist one - it's simple - it's denying of the soul, rather presenting DNA that sums everything about you, and your future. I don't consider myself as a trash can - as it was said by Richard Dawkins who said that people are just containers for DNA. So, Dawkins did what none of philosophers even dared to do - he just expressed his own view of what the purpose of life is, making it the oath for all the generations. No, I think that everything is more difficult and complex that it's about just DNA. Despite of it, I think that DNA influences on us as living organisms. I mean in my life I noticed that people suffered or were happier because of their genes. And it also happens more often when smart parents have smart kids, while dumb parents have dumb kids (and as I said, it doesn't mean to be the rule; only possibilities). Whites Who Are Born Rich Hate and Fear All Other White PeopleThe feralphiles claim it is hypocrisy, but those who believe in racial genetic inferiority can be consistent even if they don't believe in individual genetic superiority within a superior race. Baseball is a good example. A player with Hall of Fame talent (Denny McClain) married the daughter of Hall of Famer Lou Boudreau. Their sons never played professionally. Secondly, although the players whose fathers played are thousands of times what random selection would produce, they still represent a minuscule percentage of the total number of those who play professionally. College graduates are never taught that the exception proves the rule. In fact, college is basically hereditary itself, not by talent but by the fact that it is designed only for richkids living off an allowance. The rest are no-talent brown-nosing teenagers who are afraid to grow up. So admission is all Affirmative Action: Blacks, Browns, Brown-Noses, and Bluebloods. Therefore, a system that reflects Birth-Class Supremacy is inferior, which is consistent with the fact the hereditary wealth, property, social influence, and political power is the well-hidden enemy of human progress row However, the Denny McClain's and the daughter of Hall of Famer Lou Boudreau's son did played baseball. And he had skills. I don't think that the league or any hall of fames can be calculated. We just can't say that a son of Obama will be a president, or that he (Obama's son) will be a liberal. But we could say that the son Obama would have the habits his father had. And the more material habits are, the more precise our foreseens would be. I agree with you on that how the system exploits its members on lower staircase platforms. This system must be destroyed. Maybe it'll take aeons, but it must be eliminated.
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Aug 6, 2021 21:16:48 GMT
Eugene 2.0When I was in psych honors i was told: "if you study psychology long enough, you become a christian" i did not believe them as i considered myself a pagan, though i did accept there must be a lord of all creation, i was a hindu-norse-greek-celt smorgasbord of eclectic spirituality, i had a deep dislike of christians, tho i had nothing against christ's teachings - afrikaner christianity was worse than atheism from my perspective then but, i was mistaken, for none of the pagan gods spoke to me personally, and both John and Jesus did which is itself a deep proof of their realness, at least, it should be to those who knew me back then, as i was never going to put myself in the same religious group as my enemies, simply for cultural or philosophical reasons it can only be by miracle that i do consider myself at least partially christian - tho i must admit, less so, now that the world has taken such advantage of christian mild temper as my fury grows with the idiocracy - i will not wage war in christ's name - and so i pick up the hammer of thor with all the regret i can muster and more
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Aug 6, 2021 21:24:08 GMT
thesageofmainstreetif not hereditary, then such power can only be seized by violence which certainly occurs due to psycho-social corruption,and complacency, france, russia, apartheid govt, and so many others but then the new owners are themselves corrupted over time, showing that any person who rises to power can never do so from genetic superiority, but thru personal will, and skill, and let us not forget sheer luck but when push comes to shove, it can often be the hidden realm of spirituality that seeps into the broken hearts of love and as the cynic in you hates the light so it enshrouds itself in ever yet more spite and that is why you keep losing the fight
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Aug 7, 2021 5:58:58 GMT
This thread is beneath discussion. Denying genetics is like denying that the Earth is round or that water is wet. Come on folks, isn't anyone here sane?
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Aug 7, 2021 15:07:08 GMT
This thread is beneath discussion. Denying genetics is like denying that the Earth is round or that water is wet. Come on folks, isn't anyone here sane?
to disagree with the content of the thread, one must first demonstrate that one has actually
read the content of the thread
questioning the mental health of people without
any recourse to psychological training, or psychological
text, discourse, terminology or even a vague reference
to some foundational sphere of psychology, is a sign of
delusion in the person making such a claim
moreover if a person does have a mental disorder the worst thing you can do is use that as a weapon against them as a underhanded tactic of slander
you can be placed in an asylum for the rest of your life for impersonating a psychologist - without any court case as you can be said to be not mentally capable of understanding what that entails
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Aug 10, 2021 16:49:47 GMT
Whites Who Are Born Rich Hate and Fear All Other White PeopleThe feralphiles claim it is hypocrisy, but those who believe in racial genetic inferiority can be consistent even if they don't believe in individual genetic superiority within a superior race. Baseball is a good example. A player with Hall of Fame talent (Denny McClain) married the daughter of Hall of Famer Lou Boudreau. Their sons never played professionally. Secondly, although the players whose fathers played are thousands of times what random selection would produce, they still represent a minuscule percentage of the total number of those who play professionally. College graduates are never taught that the exception proves the rule. In fact, college is basically hereditary itself, not by talent but by the fact that it is designed only for richkids living off an allowance. The rest are no-talent brown-nosing teenagers who are afraid to grow up. So admission is all Affirmative Action: Blacks, Browns, Brown-Noses, and Bluebloods. Therefore, a system that reflects Birth-Class Supremacy is inferior, which is consistent with the fact the hereditary wealth, property, social influence, and political power is the well-hidden enemy of human progress row However, the Denny McClain's and the daughter of Hall of Famer Lou Boudreau's son did played baseball. And he had skills. I don't think that the league or any hall of fames can be calculated. We just can't say that a son of Obama will be a president, or that he (Obama's son) will be a liberal. But we could say that the son Obama would have the habits his father had. And the more material habits are, the more precise our foreseens would be. I agree with you on that how the system exploits its members on lower staircase platforms. This system must be destroyed. Maybe it'll take aeons, but it must be eliminated. Because of Their Mind Control, "Birth Class Supremacy" Is Not Even a Term
Cut the HeirHeads off at age 18. No trust funds, no inheritance, no allowance in college. We won't be free until we acquire the attitude, "If we have to do it on our own, so must they." Take over their pre-owned government and outlaw all those nation-destroying privileges.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Aug 10, 2021 16:58:27 GMT
However, the Denny McClain's and the daughter of Hall of Famer Lou Boudreau's son did played baseball. And he had skills. I don't think that the league or any hall of fames can be calculated. We just can't say that a son of Obama will be a president, or that he (Obama's son) will be a liberal. But we could say that the son Obama would have the habits his father had. And the more material habits are, the more precise our foreseens would be. I agree with you on that how the system exploits its members on lower staircase platforms. This system must be destroyed. Maybe it'll take aeons, but it must be eliminated. Because of Their Mind Control, "Birth Class Supremacy" Is Not Even a Term
Cut the HeirHeads off at age 18. No trust funds, no inheritance, no allowance in college. We won't be free until we acquire the attitude, "If we have to do it on our own, so must they." Take over their pre-owned government and outlaw all those nation-destroying privileges. Poker Faces: They Will Not Ever Reveal Their Real Attitude To PublicityThat's right. This situation will be better. They've been trying to close our eyes on many problems which surround us. And they do it like they breathe. And their sons&daughters act like them. Not almost know that Al Capone organized all those charity parties to hide his snoopy filthy deals under the table of everyone's silence.
|
|
|
Post by xxxxxxxxx on Aug 10, 2021 23:22:25 GMT
As for my first assertion, can anyone here PROVE that genetics is anything more than pseudo-science?
In specific all the racial classification going on,
which to me simply looks like the sophistry of racism.
Is there an experiment I can actually do that has some meaningful use here?
Genetics is classification. Classification is science. Genetics is science. As to the quote it is in reference to a stopping of any form of rationalism which takes one away from faith. To speculate is to rationalize and to over emphasize reason at the expense of faith is harmful.
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Aug 11, 2021 5:25:55 GMT
Nope I cant prove that nor is there proof to begin with. As per racial classification it isn't racism. It like looking at a box of crayons and identifying what you see like yellow, brown, black, etc. That isn't being racist against colors simply by doing that or trying to see if a blue/green color can be classified as more blue or green. Racism is more of being against a person because of their color than identifying their color. By against I don't mean just having a preference for liking just a mere person over another because you can dislike a person of your own race or color despite them being family or not. This dislike isn't really based on color and isn't racism but their personality that makes it hard to be around them. Now if one just dislikes them based on color alone then it is purely racism because there are bad and good people in all races so the bias in a person just wont let the other person prove themselves to be a good person. Now that is ok too because people have that right to be racisf and that to me shows right off the bat who has a big ego and someone I wouldn't be friends with irl. Don't care for their color. If I see someone with that ego in need of help who has my skin color and another one with a skin color the egomaniac is putting down who needs help too...then I will help the one who isn't driving me nuts with their big ego and secretly hope I will be too late to help the egomaniac to avoid future headaches from them.
|
|
|
Post by fschmidt on Aug 11, 2021 16:41:15 GMT
Genetics is classification. No, genetics is not classification. As Wikipedia say: Genetics is a branch of biology concerned with the study of genes, genetic variation, and heredity in organisms. Genetics really started with Mendel who was a Augustinian friar. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that no one here understands genetics or has stood up for it. We live in an idiocracy where increasing numbers of people believe that the Earth is flat. I post to forums like this one (one of the few where I haven't been banned) in the hope of finding intelligent life, but it mostly seems futile.
|
|
|
Post by thesageofmainstreet on Aug 11, 2021 17:27:09 GMT
Nope I cant prove that nor is there proof to begin with. As per racial classification it isn't racism. It like looking at a box of crayons and identifying what you see like yellow, brown, black, etc. That isn't being racist against colors simply by doing that or trying to see if a blue/green color can be classified as more blue or green. Racism is more of being against a person because of their color than identifying their color. By against I don't mean just having a preference for liking just a mere person over another because you can dislike a person of your own race or color despite them being family or not. This dislike isn't really based on color and isn't racism but their personality that makes it hard to be around them. Now if one just dislikes them based on color alone then it is purely racism because there are bad and good people in all races so the bias in a person just wont let the other person prove themselves to be a good person. Now that is ok too because people have that right to be racisf and that to me shows right off the bat who has a big ego and someone I wouldn't be friends with irl. Don't care for their color. If I see someone with that ego in need of help who has my skin color and another one with a skin color the egomaniac is putting down who needs help too...then I will help the one who isn't driving me nuts with their big ego and secretly hope I will be too late to help the egomaniac to avoid future headaches from them. I Have a Dream That I Will One Day Be Judged by the Content of My Posts and Not By the Color of My Avatar!This charge by that criminal rabble-rouser, Martin Luther King, that his savage people are discriminated against only because of the color of their skin is purposely simple-minded and viciously dishonest. It's as retarded as saying that those who opposed Hitler were motivated only by dislike of his mustache.
|
|
|
Post by Eugene 2.0 on Aug 11, 2021 18:42:48 GMT
As for my first assertion, can anyone here PROVE that genetics is anything more than pseudo-science?
In specific all the racial classification going on,
which to me simply looks like the sophistry of racism.
Is there an experiment I can actually do that has some meaningful use here?
Genetics is classification. Classification is science. Genetics is science. As to the quote it is in reference to a stopping of any form of rationalism which takes one away from faith. To speculate is to rationalize and to over emphasize reason at the expense of faith is harmful. I don't really know about the genetics, but the classification isn't science. You can index all your files on your computer and order them in a certain sequence. Does it make you a scientist?
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Aug 11, 2021 19:54:03 GMT
As for my first assertion, can anyone here PROVE that genetics is anything more than pseudo-science?
In specific all the racial classification going on,
which to me simply looks like the sophistry of racism.
Is there an experiment I can actually do that has some meaningful use here?
Genetics is classification. Classification is science. Genetics is science. As to the quote it is in reference to a stopping of any form of rationalism which takes one away from faith. To speculate is to rationalize and to over emphasize reason at the expense of faith is harmful. Science requires logic, not just arbitrary classification without any merit or effect in its implementation. Astrologers classify people according to star-signs. That does not make it science. They then claim preposterous causality without any baring on reality, and people follow it mindlessly just like they do with genetics. There is no functional difference at all.
The word "rationalism" is ambiguous. In psychology we use it to describe the illusion of rationality, much like we might separate the two words "Ras Tafari" and "Rastafarianism". The latter having the appearance, but the former being the true believers.
But to rationalize, is the proper use of the term. True rationality can only aid faith, and itself be aided by faith.
So rationalism always hinders faith. There may be a true science within the biology of the body. And basic ideas of medicine certainly work; like body PH, for example. But genetics theory is an arbitrary fabrication, and is no more than an elaborate ponzi scheme, based on 'smoke and mirrors.'
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Aug 11, 2021 20:10:44 GMT
Nope I cant prove that nor is there proof to begin with. As per racial classification it isn't racism. It like looking at a box of crayons and identifying what you see like yellow, brown, black, etc. That isn't being racist against colors simply by doing that or trying to see if a blue/green color can be classified as more blue or green. Racism is more of being against a person because of their color than identifying their color. By against I don't mean just having a preference for liking just a mere person over another because you can dislike a person of your own race or color despite them being family or not. This dislike isn't really based on color and isn't racism but their personality that makes it hard to be around them. Now if one just dislikes them based on color alone then it is purely racism because there are bad and good people in all races so the bias in a person just wont let the other person prove themselves to be a good person. Now that is ok too because people have that right to be racisf and that to me shows right off the bat who has a big ego and someone I wouldn't be friends with irl. Don't care for their color. If I see someone with that ego in need of help who has my skin color and another one with a skin color the egomaniac is putting down who needs help too...then I will help the one who isn't driving me nuts with their big ego and secretly hope I will be too late to help the egomaniac to avoid future headaches from them.
There are two main issues here. Firstly, you assume that genetics is basically the classification of color, which it certainly is, but if it were being for real, color would be just one of many other features. And as you rightly say, color would be an
arbitrary feature. But its typically the main criteria.
Secondly the causes of personality are a hotly debated issue. Geneticists (the most prominent ones) consider that personality and all its features, such as intelligence, are dictated by genes. They hope to be able to 'weed out' the less intelligent genes as a consequence of these studies, much like they 'theoretically'
claim to do with producing new strains of plants, for example.
So the result of both these points is the same:
Geneticists have an underlying aim of genocide. And their primary concern is to identify "less intelligent" genes via their racial classification. Its eugenics which ever way you look at it.
Moreover genetic theory disavows the existence of the soul. Plain and simple: They consider anyone who claims the existence of the soul, whether by belief, or logic, or empirical claim, they consider such people to be "insane".
A weak gene. That needs to be removed from the gene-pool. Again their implicit goal is: genocide.
Whether that "gene" is real or not, has not even been touched
on here. And still, there is no proof that genes are real either. So it remains that to be a geneticist is to be a psychopath. Because their intent is to kill those who do not have their
allegedly "superior" atheist genes.
|
|
Clovis Merovingian
Prestige/VIP
Elder
Posts: 2,698
Likes: 1,758
Meta-Ethnicity: Anglo-American
Ethnicity: Deep Southerner
Country: My State and my Region are my country
Region: The Deep South
Location: South Carolina
Ancestry: Gaelic (patrilineal), English, Ulster Scots/Scots Irish, Scottish, German, Swiss German, Swedish, Manx, Finnish, Norman French/Quebecois (distantly), Dutch (distantly)
Taxonomy: Borreby/Alpine/ Nordid mix
Y-DNA: R-S660/R-DF109
mtDNA: T1a1
Politics: Conservative
Religion: Christian
Hero: Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, James K. Polk
Age: 30
Philosophy: I try to find out what is true as best I can.
|
Post by Clovis Merovingian on Aug 12, 2021 1:14:15 GMT
Genetics is classification. No, genetics is not classification. As Wikipedia say: Genetics is a branch of biology concerned with the study of genes, genetic variation, and heredity in organisms. Genetics really started with Mendel who was a Augustinian friar. I guess I shouldn't be surprised that no one here understands genetics or has stood up for it. We live in an idiocracy where increasing numbers of people believe that the Earth is flat. I post to forums like this one (one of the few where I haven't been banned) in the hope of finding intelligent life, but it mostly seems futile. There are people on here who believe in the science and validity of genetics but do not to feel the need to waste their time arguing with people who are not using their brains and God given logic and rationality to try and find the truth of things by thinking critically and are rather reacting emotionally to preconceived notions coming from bad life experiences such as fighting South African apartheid, or arrogant philosophical sophistic pseudo intellectual pretentiousness, or just a genuine ignorance about the subject possibly colored by mistaken religious interpretations. It is best not to waste your time arguing with people who's mind you can't change and who are not on the same page with you morally or epistemologically and are too stubborn and too ignorant and too proudly stubborn in their ignorance to change their mind. It's why I often am wary to weigh in on these debates. What is the point of arguing with rocks? It's why I try not to deal with you much actually. We are not on the same page morally and its a waste of time trying to explain why wanting most people dead is wrong.
|
|