If you could alter genetic makeup of your baby would you do it?

[Siro]

When seperating out each trait such as red heads, your explanations make more sense, but people of different race arent just defined by one characteristic. Its a whole assortment of things. Take albino africans for example. They have white skin, but there is no mistaken what race they are. Those traits dont change until you introduce a new race. Why is that?

Red heads should be there own race btw.

Like I said in my previous posts, there is no reason for the grouping of those characteristics into one "race".

Here's a fairly typical Italian (white):

or

Why is that phenotype closer to this Irish (white) one:

Than to this Algerian (not white) one:

Now I am sure you can find some average difference that are closer in one group than another to make a point about some characteristic litmus test, but the decision is arbitrary.

Race exists because as Europeans developed closer ties under Christianity and set forth to explore the world, they found non-Europeans who had different looks and cultures. So they designated themselves as "white" based on their average skin color, to differentiate themselves from the "others".

If no such historical fusion happened, something else might have come along. Maybe Islam would have united the Northern Africans with the Spaniards, and they set forth as the Tans to differentiate themselves from the other "races".

 

[Hotdog]

Race is identified by a combination of characteristics isnt it? Why do most those characteristics always show up together, What bonds them together, if its not something like race? How is that a social construct?

 

[Siro]

Race is identified by a combination of characteristics isnt it? Why do most those characteristics always show up together, What bonds them together, if its not something like race? How is that a social construct?

Those characteristics don't always show up together. People just decide which to include and which to ignore. The fact that Greeks have a very different facial structure than Fins doesn't factor into your definition of race. But the fact their average skin color is a lot closer to Fins than to Sudanese is factored in. You could create as many and as few races as you want.

I think you might be too focused on the American whites, who are a mixture of a million different European ethnicities (along with non-Europeans). Think about it in broader terms. I already answered your questions many many times. I don't feel like you've responded, or considered, a single point I've made. So I don't know what else to say.

 

[Siro]

I was thinking about Hack's, and others', attachment to the concept of race (while in bed, smh). I think I get it. Taking a purely American perspective makes race seem a lot more concrete than it really is.

That is because the American situation is unique. A wholesale phenotype homogenization has occurred among the different groups due to the historical forces that shaped the nation. Europeans migrated into the US and merged with one another, while largely avoiding mixture with non-European peoples, morphing into a more homogeneous super-ethnicity. The same applies to Africans who were segregated from white society and ended up with their own super-ethnicity and distinct culture. Looking at the issue through that lens, race appears to be on solid grounds.

But it is more instructive to look at the relatively heterogeneous Old World cultures to see the shaky grounds on which race stands. That's why I avoided focusing on New World examples. The Americas are just too much of a melting pot, with different phenotypes separated within the same country due to their history.

Nonetheless, the Old World illuminates an aspect of the human condition that applies equally to the New World. If one takes time to understand why race is an arbitrary social concept through analysis of the Old World, one can understand why it is equally useless in the New World.

Okay, good night ffs.

 

[UGLI baby]

There's only one race out there, and that's the human race.

#Boom

#MicDrop

/Thread

 

[Hekate]

There's only one race out there, and that's the human race.

#Boom

#MicDrop

/Thread

That's racialist.

 

[MVP]

Can we drop race arguments and get back to original idea? I know it sounds like science fiction now but I bet in the future altering genetic makeup of humans will be possible and inevitably questions of morality and unborn rights will surface. Heck, if people can circumcise baby boys without asking their opinion and there is a lot of talks about violating their rights, then I expect even more uproar about genetic reconstruction.

 

[b_line]

Can we drop race arguments and get back to original idea? I know it sounds like science fiction now but I bet in the future altering genetic makeup of humans will be possible and inevitably questions of morality and unborn rights will surface. Heck, if people can circumcise baby boys without asking their opinion and there is a lot of talks about violating their rights, then I expect even more uproar about genetic reconstruction.

It doesn't really sound like science fiction, it's pretty much here already, we just are very primitive at it. It's gonna be huge, tremendous, very successful.

 

[BYE]

So why do black people remain black from generation to generation? It certainly isn't becsusr they are in the sun all day any more (at least bit in the US ).

If being black or yellow or red or white has nothing to do with our genetic heritage, then why are my kids so damn pale?

You are acting like there are no such things as heritable traits that exhibit themselves over a broad pattern.

Sure, melanin content can be random at times, but the extremely overwhelming majority of children are not going to be albinos.

It may not be race, but acting like these things don't exist is extremely odd.

Tell me how you define a genetically similar group of people if not by using the word race?

This is the crux of the problem. The word "race" in English has one meaning to you and many different meanings to other people. The word "race," like any other word, has an etymology. The word has developed and changed its meaning through the years from its origin. Now we are in the midst of defining it, and you won't even get the same definition from person to person, let alone region to region. We define what "race" is. There is no fact waiting to be found that constitutes "race." "Race" is a means by which we classify something, not scientifically, but culturally. "Race" was never based in science and is based off of an idea of purity and a fallacious idea that we can delineate precisely what "race" is. It started culturally and still is a cultural construct.

When you bring in genetics, you are now trying to subsume modern science into a historically cultural means of classification. The question is, "What genetic markers constitute a given 'race.'" How many matching genetic markers does one need to be included into a "race"? Which ones are excluded? What percentage of a person needs to be from a given continent in order to be included in a given "race"? Are there multiple "races" from these general regions, and how do you determine the micro features that would differentiate these various "micro races" from a given continent of origin? As an example, Africa, a continent, has the most genetically diverse population by far. So, which peoples constitute disparate "races" in Africa, and then how do we account for the percentages of these originally disparate "races," which are now found in varying proportions within the genetic code of a given human being that may have genetics from multiple continents?

When it comes down to it, "genetics" is a way for people to feel comfortable with their continued use of a culturally determined word "race." "Race" started culturally, and still is a cultural construct. This reality is assumed within the vast majority of academic institutions, be it in the humanities or the sciences.

 

[Ron Mexico]

If I had a kid and it was proven safe to do all of it I would. I would definitely get rid of any genetic diseases and defects but I would also do other stuff. I would give them better metabolism, athleticism, improved intelligence and any thing else to make their life better. I would pick the eye, color, hair color, and all that stuff. I would not do anything to effect their sexuality since I dont think that matters nor do I think it is set, I think it is fluid anyways. People are already doing this to some extent by picking a partner to have a baby with.

On a side not I agree with what Siro is saying about race being a construct of society. However saying that all white people are considered the same race does not seem true to me. I guess in the last 50 years in the US it is heading that way but groups such as Italians, Irish and others have traditionally been considered a different race. I guess most people who have arbitrarily assigned race categories have white as a category but there are usually sub categories. But genetically the similarity of people with the same eye color is just as much a thing as people with the same skin color. It just as easily could have been arbitrarily decided in the world to define your "race" by something such as eye color, hair color, height or anything else. Two siblings from the same parents could have the genetic markers to show their ancestors to be from very different places. I know the ancestry.com does the DNA test to show your "ethnicity" and two of my brothers have had it and they are not close. One is dominantly German and the other is Italian I think. One has some native american genetic marker and the other does not. You could have more genetic similarities with someone of a different "race" than someone within your own "race."

 

[Siro]

If I had a kid and it was proven safe to do all of it I would. I would definitely get rid of any genetic diseases and defects but I would also do other stuff. I would give them better metabolism, athleticism, improved intelligence and any thing else to make their life better. I would pick the eye, color, hair color, and all that stuff. I would not do anything to effect their sexuality since I dont think that matters nor do I think it is set, I think it is fluid anyways. People are already doing this to some extent by picking a partner to have a baby with.

On a side not I agree with what Siro is saying about race being a construct of society. However saying that all white people are considered the same race does not seem true to me. I guess in the last 50 years in the US it is heading that way but groups such as Italians, Irish and others have traditionally been considered a different race. I guess most people who have arbitrarily assigned race categories have white as a category but there are usually sub categories. But genetically the similarity of people with the same eye color is just as much a thing as people with the same skin color. It just as easily could have been arbitrarily decided in the world to define your "race" by something such as eye color, hair color, height or anything else. Two siblings from the same parents could have the genetic markers to show their ancestors to be from very different places. I know the ancestry.com does the DNA test to show your "ethnicity" and two of my brothers have had it and they are not close. One is dominantly German and the other is Italian I think. One has some native american genetic marker and the other does not. You could have more genetic similarities with someone of a different "race" than someone within your own "race."

The thing about picking preferred traits like intelligence or athleticism (which I would rather NOT be done by the parent), is that it won't really confer any advantage in real life. Simply because the technology won't only be available to you. Making your child an elite athlete is irrelevant when millions others have done the same thing, as far as professional sports are concerned. Intelligence is even more problematic because it's not really one thing. It is a multi-faceted phenomenon, and I don't like the idea of tailoring your child's cognition to suit what parts of intelligence you value.

It is interesting to consider what the world would be like when everyone has access to such technologies.

 

[Ron Mexico]

The thing about picking preferred traits like intelligence or athleticism (which I would rather NOT be done by the parent), is that it won't really confer any advantage in real life. Simply because the technology won't only be available to you. Making your child an elite athlete is irrelevant when millions others have done the same thing, as far as professional sports are concerned. Intelligence is even more problematic because it's not really one thing. It is a multi-faceted phenomenon, and I don't like the idea of tailoring your child's cognition to suit what parts of intelligence you value.

It is interesting to consider what the world would be like when everyone has access to such technologies.

Athleticism would be an advantage if others were not doing it or it would put your kid at a disadvantage if you were not doing it. However the reasons I would do it would not be for sports reasons but for health reasons and ease of day to day activities in life. Its effect and efficiency would have to be greatly researched and studied before I would do it to my kid but I would if it helped. Things such as greater lung capacity, metabolism, muscle fiber types and number of them in different regions would all be things I would consider. As far as intelligence goes, there are many factors and I would aim for ones that improve their life. Such factors might include things that help with improved problem solving or just related to general happiness. I dont know why people wouldn't want to give their kid the best chance if it is a proven to help and be effective. I think it would be easy to begin (or there are already many in existence) studies on genetic markers and how they help overall. The "moral" issue is not one that I care about or think is a real issue. People have been trying to choose better genes for their kids in many different ways since the beginning of time.

I agree in general that letting parents pick out any of these things could be problematic for society and way to complex to leave up to them. But letting parents have kids and raise them has always been problematic and too complex in the same way, its nothing new. I think the vast majority of parents are terrible at it.