Racism

[agapooka]

Who says that there's no other way? You did.

Oh and IQ tests are tools among other tools, the purpose of which is to attempt to quantify such a complex and abstract concept as intelligence. Their purpose is never to qualify an individual as intelligent! The assumption that because an IQ test cannot qualify an individual as intelligent, the word "intelligent" ought not be used is silly at best. Silly because there are no reasonable grounds for one to limit oneself to such a narrow conclusion.

Yes, this is a pointless tangent, but I'm really wondering if you're going anywhere with this and I'm going along with it out of curiosity.

[Cole]

Who says that there's no other way? You did.

Oh and IQ tests are tools among other tools, the purpose of which is to attempt to quantify such a complex and abstract concept as intelligence. Their purpose is never to qualify an individual as intelligent! The assumption that because an IQ test cannot qualify an individual as intelligent, the word "intelligent" ought not be used is silly at best. Silly because there are no reasonable grounds for one to limit oneself to such a narrow conclusion.

Yes, this is a pointless tangent, but I'm really wondering if you're going anywhere with this and I'm going along with it out of curiosity.

Then...how can you say someone is intelligent, or not?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VJghQMq4 ... -fresh+div

On topic...here is where ignorance leads..sad. 3:08-3:11 especially.
Here we have a proof of how can far ignorance and stupidity can go!
"Because he's black he's dirty". Pfff and there I think it's a good example of the "idiotic white people".

[agapooka]

So, Jim, everyone is the same, acts the same and only presents their mental faculties in IQ tests? It can't be simplified to such an extent. I mentioned various types of intelligence, earlier. ONE example would be that there are individuals who are very quick at understanding and creating intricate spatial and logical constructs, who are so socially retarded that they are afraid to meet new people.

To reiterate what I said earlier, but with this understanding in mind, there are many who have created ideologies, which have been deemed to be fundamentally racist, who exhibited a high ability to rationalise those concepts and argue them convincingly. Some have even used their high social intelligence to convince others of their own ideas and to manipulate those others, having them do violent crimes. There are many such cases with racist cults. One comes to mind where there was a cult of blacks who lived together in a compound and were instructed to murder various whites only because whites were believed to be inferior.

[Cole]

Yep, that's how I see it too.
An "intelligent" fool with crazy ideals who convinces and leads an "army of idiots" because he manages to manipulate them and convince them that they should follow him.
Problem being for those "intelligent" leaders, is that they most of times, have something wrong in them, which explains why they have such foolish ideas.

[agapooka]

Of course, anyone who doesn't question absolutely everything will be deceived. It is irrelevant to whether or not you believe an individual to be stupid.

One might even question why one must even treat anyone else kindly. The answer is found in asking greater philosophical questions. Is there such a thing as moral? If not, what makes genocide wrong? Status quo? What if I decide that the status quo is wrong?

If there is a higher moral than defined by the self, who defines it and what kind of authority do they claim over you that allows them to define and impose their morals on you? Do you accept or reject this claim that they make over you? Are you in a position to do so?

If you yourself believe that it is wrong, what is your rationale? What makes you think that you have the capacity to be right? Whereupon do you base that belief?

Before asking oneself whether or not racism is an important problem, it would be wise to understand whether or not it even is a problem and why. Perhaps there is selfish interest in promoting equality for all, in the hopes that one benefits from it as well. If this is the case, it is a matter of selfishness and not morals. Likewise, many saw that exploiting others as slaves was in their own interest. I see little difference, unless one can justify the existence of a higher moral standard.

[Cole]

Of course, anyone who doesn't question absolutely everything will be deceived. It is irrelevant to whether or not you believe an individual to be stupid.

One might even question why one must even treat anyone else kindly. The answer is found in asking greater philosophical questions. Is there such a thing as moral? If not, what makes genocide wrong? Status quo? What if I decide that the status quo is wrong?

If there is a higher moral than defined by the self, who defines it and what kind of authority do they claim over you that allows them to define and impose their morals on you? Do you accept or reject this claim that they make over you? Are you in a position to do so?

If you yourself believe that it is wrong, what is your rationale? What makes you think that you have the capacity to be right? Whereupon do you base that belief?

Before asking oneself whether or not racism is an important problem, it would be wise to understand whether or not it even is a problem and why. Perhaps there is selfish interest in promoting equality for all, in the hopes that one benefits from it as well. If this is the case, it is a matter of selfishness and not morals. Likewise, many saw that exploiting others as slaves was in their own interest. I see little difference, unless one can justify the existence of a higher moral standard.

Treat others kindly, well, you should treat kndly those who deserve it, and who would probably treat you kindly as well. Don't do to others what you wouldn't like they do to you. Sure, treating everyone kindly is wrong, as you can be sure some wouldn't do so in return.
Morale is simple why it exists. If there was no morale, we would probably face either far west from cowboy days with cheating, gun duals, and all those bad things happening there, or a situation similar to hobbes' describing of a world without order and morale: everyone fights for supremacy and everyone is enemy to everyone. Why is genocide wrong? That's a good question.
Genocide is wrong because noone is abilited to decide whether someone deserves to die or not, unless this person lives in a country where death penalty exists of course. I'm not going to talk about death penalties more otherwise it would go off topic (it's already lol). Afterall, why would mister X deserve more to die than mister Y? Nobody is "superior" enough to determine whether someone has to die, unless this person is menace to society (what death penalty is meant to solve in theory) and is causing alot more troubles alive than dead.
For the morals, I pick the ones I want lol.
I'll post about rest later

[Demeisen]

id say racism is partly a natural feeling. for survival its quite important to like those similar to yourself (your tribe for example) and dislike those different from you ( eg. another tribe). sticking with your own sort while shunning those different from you is possibly a basic human instinct?

id imagine it is the same with other species as well. like if you put one particular monkey species among a group of other monkeys there could be a beef if they were competing for limited resources.

but modern day racism has taken a very different route from survival. it often has no basis and therefore isnt really helpful to a person. WTH is up with organised racism. thats too far and requires conscious effort to hate, rather than a natural dislike of whats different.


i do discriminate against people. but its not a blind choice. i judge different types of people by my experiences with them. its not being racist, its being realist. some may still say its racist to discriminate against the many for the actions of the few. i would ask those people to live my life before placing a label.

clarification. a fictional scenario:
i love native American Indians.
then
30 native American Indians beat me up
then
a native American Indian spits in my mouth when i yawn one time
then
i might dislike native American Indians for actions against me


i wouldnt see that as racist as it is coming to a determination using personal experience.

[Cole]

Your example is different from what the lil moron said on video I did post, which is clearly racism there. As it's statement built up on idiocy and ignorance.
Yours is hmm...hard to define.

[Tacet]

@LiQuiD - I understand what you're saying, but according to those standards I shouldn't like white ppl, black ppl, girls, guys, ... I prefer to judge each person I meet on their own merit.

[Rudy Peña]

WASP's are the absolutely most racist people I know! *points at the KKK as proof*





*goads Lore into a debate on racism*

You will fail miserably LOL

And saying all WASP are KKK members is like saying all Latinos are short dirty people who talk funny. Its just not true.

Hey, its not our fault that most of us are 4'1.

Racism against black people is the fault of black people.
If there were no black people, there would not be racism against black people.

Yes. This is solid proof.

And if there were no hispanics, then there wouldn't be racism against us.
Or if there were no Jewish people, Muslism, Asian people there wouldn't be racism against them. ANd so by your logic white people are the supreme race cause white people are racist against all these people. So do you think Hitler was right to kill over 6 million Jewish people? Cause by your logic if Jewish people weren't around then Hitler woundn't have killed them cause there was none to kill.

[Cole]

No she did mean that there's racist against black people because there are black people. (like divorce exist because there are marriages, to quote her)
It's been corrected few pages ago. And I criticized it as it's obvious too much and explains nothing much.
Like if we say there's hate on Bush because Bush exists.

[agapooka]

And if there were no hispanics, then there wouldn't be racism against us. Or if there were no Jewish people, Muslism, Asian people there wouldn't be racism against them. ANd so by your logic white people are the supreme race cause white people are racist against all these people. So do you think Hitler was right to kill over 6 million Jewish people? Cause by your logic if Jewish people weren't around then Hitler woundn't have killed them cause there was none to kill.

That was the most pathetic conclusion I've seen someone make this week.

I really dislike it when people try to use the phrase "by your logic", because they then try to apply their perception of that logic by breaking every rule of logic in existence.

In terms of epic fails, the above quoted post gets a good score.

[Rudy Peña]

And if there were no hispanics, then there wouldn't be racism against us. Or if there were no Jewish people, Muslism, Asian people there wouldn't be racism against them. ANd so by your logic white people are the supreme race cause white people are racist against all these people. So do you think Hitler was right to kill over 6 million Jewish people? Cause by your logic if Jewish people weren't around then Hitler woundn't have killed them cause there was none to kill.

That was the most pathetic conclusion I've seen someone make this week.

I really dislike it when people try to use the phrase "by your logic", because they then try to apply their perception of that logic by breaking every rule of logic in existence.

In terms of epic fails, the above quoted post gets a good score.

Thanks.

[agapooka]

If I sounded harsh, it is because I intended to. I'm quite intolerant of such breaches of logic and jumping to ridiculous conclusions really gets to me. So does putting your own words in someone else's mouth and interpreting a perfectly clear statement as though there were ambiguity. Then, I really can't stand when people get all emotional and start accusing people of thinking that Hitler was right. You happened to do all of the above.

Oh and, you're welcome.

[Rudy Peña]

If I sounded harsh, it is because I intended to. I'm quite intolerant of such breaches of logic and jumping to ridiculous conclusions really gets to me. So does putting your own words in someone else's mouth and interpreting a perfectly clear statement as though there were ambiguity. Then, I really can't stand when people get all emotional and start accusing people of thinking that Hitler was right. You happened to do all of the above.
Oh and, you're welcome.

So do I get a award or something?