Can Biology Class Reduce Racism?

[essentialsaltes]

Yet the external appearance difference is profound.

I suppose, but it's 'skin deep'; it has little to do with a person's qualities.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

From what I can tell the study begins with a conclusion and is looking for evidence to support actions based upon that conclusion.

" the science classroom may be the best placed to provide a a buffer against unfounded genetic rationales for human difference that often become the basis for racial intolerance. "

IMO it is not really a study but an attempt to gather evidence to support that idea.
News outlets often mischaracterize these sorts of things as studies. To many supposed journalists, if people that can be considered scientists are doing something, no matter what that something might be, it is a study. Not every worthwhile thing must start with an actual study. If we agree that racial intolerance is bad, we do not need a study to prove it before we attempt to combat it. If we agree that facts are more reliable than feelings, we do not need a study to prove it before we use facts rather than feelings to inform people. So if these people can indeed provide factual evidence to students that will provide a buffer against unfounded rationales, I am all for it.

I don't think "unfounded genetic rationales" are all that meaningful in the overall discussion about racism. It will have to be established that disproving these rationales will have a substantially positive effect on the problem as well.

 

[essentialsaltes]

IMO it is not really a study but an attempt to gather evidence to support that idea.

Or refute it. What in heaven's name do you think a study is?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Oh re-education camps, how novel..

One can make a lot of changes in a year.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I suppose, but it's 'skin deep'; it has little to do with a person's qualities.

That's a different topic.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Or refute it. What in heaven's name do you think a study is?

Many studies are just compilations of previous studies, to be added to the growing pile of studies.

 

[grasping the after wind]

Or refute it. What in heaven's name do you think a study is?

That is my point, I do not consider this effort to be a study.

 

[Kaon]

I don't see how some people not handling the truth is a downside of instructing people with facts. Instruction is not supposed to fix anyone it is only supposed to supply people with correct information. If people refuse to use that information to come logical conclusions, that is on them not on the instruction they received.

Because ideology doesn't necessarily follow logic or "facts". You cannot "fact" the racism out of someone; it is a psychology that requires a change in the brain. As said, there are plenty of highly intelligent people that are racist (who can teach graduate courses on biology).

Incidentally, "truth" can be quite malleable - and can be twisted to fit an ideology. History shows us this.

 

[SummerMadness]

What are you all talking about? A study is not being conducted. Differences in outcomes between different ethnic and/racial groups are not because of biology. That is fact; however, the misconception that biology is related to these differences still exists.

Previously, people in the life sciences left clearing up those misconceptions to the social sciences, but given that people persistently hold racist views based on a false understanding of biology, there is now a push to counteract this. They counteract this by reviewing and amending their curriculum so that people do not mistakenly believe the science backs up their racist views.

A study is not being conducted.

 

[Kaon]

Oh re-education camps, how novel..

It isn't re-education: it is education in this sense. Racism is extreme; you cant meet a beast like this with logic and academics - or you end up saying something like, "It's 2199... why/how is there still racism?"

And, we keep repeating the same history over and over, allowing entities to exploit us while we argue for them, and die for them. So, why not use an artifact of the past to help our modernity and future? Everyone knows that the implications of the "re-education" aforementioned would mean severe pain, or even death. The people who say, for example, immigrants, blacks, asians, etc. complain about nothing would likely never entertain the switch, because they know how they treat these people. That's the irony of the experiment, and why it would be a good one. If, in fact, these people don't experience what they say they experience - and they actually have it good, or better than the majority - they why not relish in the opportunity to "upgrade"?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

What are you all talking about? A study is not being conducted. Differences in outcomes between different ethnic and/racial groups are not because of biology. That is fact; however, the misconception that biology is related to these differences still exists.

Previously, people in the life sciences left clearing up those misconceptions to the social sciences, but given that people persistently hold racist views based on a false understanding of biology, there is now a push to counteract this. They counteract this by reviewing and amending their curriculum so that people do not mistakenly believe the science backs up their racist views.

A study is not being conducted.

How do you convince people of something without proof (a study)?

And who needs to be convinced most, the object or the subject?

 

[Hammster]

but given that people persistently hold racist views based on a false understanding of biology,

I’m pretty sure this isn’t the reason.

 

[Hazelelponi]

It isn't re-education: it is education in this sense. Racism is extreme; you cant meet a beast like this with logic and academics - or you end up saying something like, "It's 2199... why/how is there still racism?"

And, we keep repeating the same history over and over, allowing entities to exploit us while we argue for them, and die for them. So, why not use an artifact of the past to help our modernity and future? Everyone knows that the implications of the "re-education" aforementioned would mean severe pain, or even death. The people who say, for example, immigrants, blacks, asians, etc. complain about nothing would likely never entertain the switch, because they know how they treat these people. That's the irony of the experiment, and why it would be a good one. If, in fact, these people don't experience what they say they experience - and they actually have it good, or better than the majority - they why not relish in the opportunity to "upgrade"?

This post is exactly why I often avoid these political forums.

It's just beyond me why anyone thinks communist plots such as this are a positive step for humanity.

Anytime you decide your so morally superior as to be able to decide for another man what he is allowed to even think is when you begin to see others as less than human - and at that point it becomes a free for all.

racism is rooted in tribalism - funny thing, because in this country tribalism crosses all ethnic and racial boundaries. The greatest experiment of all.. and apparently filled in our modern day with the "morally superior" who want to implement their own form of hate and bigotry against those they consider "morally inferior"..

The experiment seems to be failing... wonder if we can hang on for much longer against such a travesty..

If we want something better we first have to be better ourselves, and then lead by example in love - not force by hate. Hate destroys - on any side of the fence...

 

[essentialsaltes]

What are you all talking about? A study is not being conducted.

There is, but it is not about genetic differences among races. It is about finding the best way to dispel misinformation and pseudoscience.

From the OP: "But in a study starting this month, a group of biology teachers from across the country will address it head-on. They are testing the idea that the science classroom may be the best place to provide a buffer against the unfounded genetic rationales for human difference that often become the basis for racial intolerance."

They have not assumed any conclusions. They are putting the idea to a test.

 

[Kaon]

This post is exactly why I often avoid these political forums.

It's just beyond me why anyone thinks communist plots such as this are a positive step for humanity.

Because ignoring, marginalizing and "educating people on" racism hasn't worked. You cannot stop racism with academics, you have to change the ideology. The best way to help someone to understand something is by experience - walking a mile in the shoes of the person judged.

And, the thought experiment isn't "communist".

Anytime you decide your so morally superior as to be able to decide for another man what he is allowed to even think is when you begin to see others as less than human - and at that point it becomes a free for all.

I didn't say that someone was forced to think a certain way - I am saying walk a mile in the shoes one judges. The purpose of the experiment is to get people to see what it is like to be the object of their disdain - to discourage further ignorance, prejudice and racism. The resistance to such an experiment is because deep down we know how horrid it would be - since those of us who are racist also know how we treat that race of our disdain.

If we were talking about switching lives with a billionaire, or some superhero, the line to do the switch would be too long to allow - because its "awesome" to be those entities according to our world system.

racism is rooted in tribalism - funny thing, because in this country tribalism crosses all ethnic and racial boundaries.

This is a marginalization of real racism - the type that, for example, disproportionately prosecutes and jails certain ethnic groups, or infiltrates every part of law enforcement to carry out their agenda on the objects of their disdain. It is definitely rooted in tribalism, but there are only a few groups that perpetually benefit from racism and systemic racism.

The greatest experiment of all.. and apparently filled in our modern day with the "morally superior" who want to implement their own form of hate and bigotry against those they consider "morally inferior"..

This country was founded on the work of people who were once considered animals, and inhuman; it stayed that way (overtly) until 1967. The "experiment" was based on superiority. The Western Expansion of the US was based on Manifest Destiny - a racist agenda that said it was the God-given right of the "founding" members of the country to conquer as much territory as possible. The fantasy that this nation was founded on the idea of a melting pot to house every nation is a farce, which is why things like racism cannot be cured with more "learning". The "teaching" hasn't stopped; people just don't take opportunities to be better unless they are forced to confront the learning. That is why (for this thought experiment) making someone be the object of their disdain would be one of the best ways to get someone to at least consider their prejudice before they make a psychological alignment to malign someone based on their alleged race.

The experiment seems to be failing... wonder if we can hang on for much longer against such a travesty..

It was meant to fail. All nations and experiments have an "upper limit" on their usefulness and generation.

If we want something better we first have to be better ourselves, and then lead by example in love - not force by hate. Hate destroys - on any side of the fence...

Part of being better means not ignoring the history that got us to this point, and understanding why there is a problem in the first place. Too many people psychologically flee when they are confronted with inconvenient truths, and since we repeat the same history I doubt we want to be better as humans. It seems more we want to be dominant.

Despite my thought experiment, I don't believe it will actually stop racism. It is still too logical, and racism isn't logical.

 

[Hank77]

They are testing the idea that the science classroom may be the best place to provide a buffer against the unfounded genetic rationales for human difference that often become the basis for racial intolerance.

Can anyone give examples of "unfounded genetic rationals for human difference" that "become the basis for racial intolerance?"

I'm having a hard time identifying what these may be, and seeing my grandson is taking a high school biology class right now I'd like some specifics.

 

[usexpat97]

Even English class can reduce racism. Let alone Spanish class. But that does not mean all English/history/biology/kinesiology classes and teachers will.

The biggest thing biology provides is something that is not always welcome: *FOUNDED* genetic rationale for human differences between the races. If you are looking for facts which say all the races are equal, do not look to biology. Even things such as hair and eye color--at least they can isolate that to a single chromosome. Even gender comes down to a single chromosome. Not so with race. James Watson did a study on the hereditary correlation between race and IQ, and by my read of it, it looks like, frankly, good science. Yet his treatment for writing it has been closer to Galileo's and Copernicus' treatment than scientific. It's a classic case of scientific meets politically-correct.

 

[durangodawood]

Yet the external appearance difference is profound....

Is it "profound"?

I find the difference in external appearance to be trivial.

Its not like our type of people are bipedal hominids and people from "over there" are sea anenomies.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

There is, but it is not about genetic differences among races. It is about finding the best way to dispel misinformation and pseudoscience.

From the OP: "But in a study starting this month, a group of biology teachers from across the country will address it head-on. They are testing the idea that the science classroom may be the best place to provide a buffer against the unfounded genetic rationales for human difference that often become the basis for racial intolerance."

They have not assumed any conclusions. They are putting the idea to a test.

And if some other conclusion rears it's head we will never hear of this study.

 

[essentialsaltes]

They are testing the idea that the science classroom may be the best place to provide a buffer against the unfounded genetic rationales for human difference that often become the basis for racial intolerance.

Can anyone give examples of "unfounded genetic rationals for human difference" that "become the basis for racial intolerance?"

How the online world of white nationalists distorts population genetics

Racists are literally mischaracterizing genetic data to promote their racist ideology.

Q: Can scientists do anything to prevent their work from being misused by these groups?

A: I don’t think engaging them directly will work. In an argument between a logical person and illogical person, the logical person is always going to lose because the illogical person isn’t playing by the same rules. The misappropriations and misinterpretations run so deep that you’ll just get shouted down and personally attacked, and you’re not going to change anyone’s mind.

But I think there’s growing recognition that we as scientists bear some responsibility for guiding the public interpretation of our work. In the broad scheme of things, people are excited about the work we’re doing. The genomic revolution is still well underway. But I think because of precisely that, we need to think more carefully about not just our own interpretation of the work, but anticipating how our work might be misinterpreted and trying to preemptively patch up the holes in that logic.

The study in the OP is an attempt to address this issue.