Roots of Racism

TheMadFool

Imagine a primitive man living as a hunter-gatherer in the wild lands of ancient forests and plains. He is burdened by three primary concerns viz. to eat, not be eaten himself and protect his family.

Given these pressing needs how might it affect his mental development? He needs to recognize predators, prey and family as distinct entities. Focusing only on the very basic requirements of being able to accurately identify these three major elements in his life, what mental faculty would serve him best? Supposing that this primitive man is bipedal and given that almost all animals have the same body plan, he can't rely on recognizing similarities between animals to differentiate prey from predator: deer have 4 legs, 2 eyes and 2 ears and even tigers and lions have those. Ergo, the primitive man must have the ability to see differences: tigers and lions have claws and fangs. This faculty of seeing differences that help identify predator from prey must've been selected for over countless generations until differences are perceived of almost immediately.

Recognizing similarities is also important for the primitive men: there's a pattern to prey, predator and family forms. Animals that have horns are generally prey, those that have fangs are potential predators and those who look like themselves are family.

It seems that recognizing differences is equal in importance to recognizing similarities. However, there is a sense in which knowing differences is more critical to survival than knowing similarities. We all know of natural camouflage - fur of lions have the same coloration as the savannah grass, tigers have stripes, deer can disappear among tall grass - which makes both preying and avoiding predation difficult. This would've forced evolution to sharpen our abilities to make fine distinctions in shape, color, sound, etc to help identify animals even when well hidden.

As for the ability to identify similarities, there was no selection pressure as such and just basic similarities sufficed to identify family from not-family. In fact, since both threat (predator) and opportunity (prey) evolved camouflage, it created a negative selection pressure against those who were good at identifying similarities and bad at detecting differences

Thus, the net effect was our brains evolved to see differences rather than similarities and this is the root of racism - we see differences in eye, color, face, etc. and since differences meant either prey or predator some races discriminate against other races as threats or inferiors.

Streetlight

Thus, the net effect was our brains evolved to see differences rather than similarities and this is the root of racism - we see differences in eye, color, face, etc. and since differences meant either prey or predator some races discriminate against other races as threats or inferiors. — TheMadFool

This doesn't follow at all, and it also happens to have the effect of attempting to naturalize racism, rather than recognizing it for the political phenomenon that it is. What matters is not difference simipliciter - there are as many differences between me and my daughter as there are between me and my other-raced friend - but differences deemeed significant or relevant in one way and not another. It's somewhat embarrasing that this needs to be said.

That we evolved to recognize differences is no less the 'root of racism' than the fact that we all have lungs. A necessary but not at all sufficient account of racism. Maybe think a little about what you're saying before spewing this dreck into the ether, hey?

Baden

↪TheMadFool

Racism is learned cultural behavior. At most what you'll find encoded in the genes is some preference for the familiar. Babies don't like to be surprised, for example. With real effort you could try to twist that into a "babies are racist" thing. But they're not, they just don't like to be surprised. Familiar=safe. Even something as basic as levels of aggression isn't encoded to a degree that can meaningfully override culture. Change the culture and you can go from marauding Mongol hoards to Jainist monks, all with the same genes. The Maori v Moriori story in Jared Diamond's Guns, Germs, and Steel illustrates that well. If you want to understand culture, look to social and political organization not the genes, which can potentially support whatever fuzzy narrative you want to read into them.

alcontali

Racism is learned cultural behavior. — Baden

Preference for one's (extended) family may actually be a biological behaviour. However, racism confuses one's family with one's race. Therefore, it is a spectacular bug.

Imagine that prince William's children reject prince Harry's partially-black children based on race. That would be un-biological because they are close relatives, and therefore, that behaviour would simply be a depravity.

Racism tends to occur in situations where people have no legitimate concept of extended family, and therefore, misunderstand race as family, which it is obviously not. Therefore, it mainly occurs in societies where extended families no longer exist.

In the West, it was caused by Church policies aimed at dismantling the existing clans (by banning cousin marriage). By reducing extended-family solidarity this policy allowed for increased State -and Church power. The long-term result, which was specifically desired by the Church, is that people misidentify family with country and race.

This disintegration process cannot be stopped. By stripping layer after layer of the extended family, sooner or later, even the nuclear families will start falling apart. In that sense, racism, (dumb) nationalism, punitive taxation, and a runaway divorce rate are all part of the same long-term degeneration process.

State power has indeed successfully been increased, but this result is fundamentally unsustainable, because sooner or later, the State will no longer have a population to rule over.

TheMadFool

This doesn't follow at all, and it also happens to have the effect of attempting to naturalize racism, rather than recognizing it for the political phenomenon that it is. What matters is not difference simipliciter - there are as many differences between me and my daughter as there are between me and my other-raced friend - but differences deemeed significant or relevant in one way and not another. It's somewhat embarrasing that this needs to be said.

That we evolved to recognize differences is no less the 'root of racism' than the fact that we all have lungs. A necessary but not at all sufficient account of racism. Maybe think a little about what you're saying before spewing this dreck into the ether, hey? — StreetlightX

You speak as if I'm completely wrong about this but have a look at the first few lines on racism on Wikipedia:

Racism is the belief in the superiority of one race over another. It may also mean prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against other people because they are of a different race or ethnicity.[1][2] Modern variants of racism are often based in social perceptions of biological differences between peoples — Wikipedia

It's quite clear from the passage above that racism grows out of an emphasis, or overemphasis if you like, on differences and overlooking similarities. I think my post provides a reasonable explanation as to why humans are attuned to differences rather than similarities as it aids in "discriminating" prey from predator from the community to which each individual belongs to.

Evolution is, as you already know, a veritable arms race and it so happens that blending into the background is an effective strategy for both prey and predator. Since identifying food and threat is an absolute requirement, animal camouflage exerts a selection pressure on our brains and senses in terms of enhancing "discriminatory" abilities and associating biological differences with either danger (predator) or opportunity (prey) and this probably fosters fear, dislike or a sense of right and dominion over animals that aren't like us and this is the "perfect" recipe for racism.

I've seen gnu/wildebeest herds on the African savnnah and it's impossible to ditinguish one individual from another. The same applies to other animals , whether hunter or prey. Such extremes of sameness across inividuals in animals is evidence for an evolutionry force that selects for reducing differences between inividuals of one species, at least as concerns physical appearance. As the likeness between members of a species increases the ability to see similarities is less of a priority; all individuals are almost identical to each other thus identifying your own species becomes an easy task and the ability to see similarities need not be highly developed.

Ergo, racism arises from the evolved ability to "discriminate" friend from foe or food. It is, in my opinion, a primitive instinct which gave our ancestors an advantage in the evolutionary arms race we're all part of. As is obvious it leads to all problems that has to do with discrimination - racism, communalism, jihad, etc.

Racism is learned cultural behavior — Baden

Familiar=safe — Baden

You're right and I agree that culture plays a role insofar as it encourages "discriminatory" mindsets and behavior.

Streetlight

It's quite clear from the passage above that racism grows out of an emphasis, or overemphasis if you like, on differences and overlooking similarities. — TheMadFool

Read what I said again. None of what you said responds to it. Anyone who naturalizes racism can fuck right off, including you. Your two-bit line of reasoning - which unjustifiably and erroneously jumps from the mere necessity of recognizing difference to making racism a 'primitive instinct' - is employed by racists everywhere to justify their utter bullshit. This thread is fucking trash. Use your goddman head.

Brett

↪StreetlightX

Intolerance.

The OP is the roots of racism.

180 Proof

Thus, the net effect was our brains evolved to see differences rather than similarities and this is the root of racism — TheMadFool

Maybe the dung that fertilizes Racism's growth but not "the root". Biologizing the 'theory & practice' of biologizing - reduction of acculturation to bare biology - is vapidly circular, Fool.

Perhaps, an anthropological inquiry at the level of political-economy (or approximately thereabouts) is the proper spade for digging up roots that are not nearly as deep as they entangle - strangle (i.e. incriminate) - us as we dig. Consider: Classism ... Filthy lucre ... Cui bono? :chin:

Streetlight

↪Brett

Yes.

TheMadFool

Read what I said again. None of what you said responds to it. Anyone who naturalizes racism can fuck right off, including you. Your two-bit line of reasoning - which unjustifiably and erroneously jumps from the mere necessity of recognizing difference to making racism a 'primitive instinct' - is employed by racists everywhere to justify their utter bullshit. This thread is fucking trash. Use your goddman head. — StreetlightX

I'm not trying to justify or naturalize racism; all I'm offering here is a biological explanation for it. The keystone premise is that all conflict originates in a perceived difference; surely you know that. You're not a racist as is obvious but to oppose racism one must demand equality of the races and what is equality but a cry for recognition of sameness of peoples and that the differences that divide us should be ignored. All I did was pick up the thread from there and explore the territory.

Maybe the dung that fertilizes Racism's growth but not "the root". Biologizing the 'theory & practice' of biologizing - reduction of acculturation to bare biology - is vapidly circular, Fool.

Perhaps, an anthropological inquiry at the level of political-economy (or approximately thereabouts) is the proper spade for digging up roots that are not nearly as deep as they entangle - strangle (i.e. incriminate) - us as we dig. Consider: Classism ... Filthy lucre ... Cui bono? :chin: — 180 Proof

It maybe vapid but it isn't circular. Racism is, at its core, difference-based and discerning dissimilarities is clearly an essential ability for survival. Putting two and two together I trace racism's origins to the ability of our ancestors to notice that something's not quite right with the grass - it resembles ordinary grass but it isn't; actually it's crouching tiger or it's a plump deer.

Politics and economics, although relevant to how racism took shape in history - slavery, rights, etc. - don't explain its origins which is quite clearly based on biology which then spread out into politics and economics.

Streetlight

I'm not trying to justify or naturalize racism; all I'm offering here is a biological explanation for it. — TheMadFool

You're not offering shit. Racism is premised on differences deemed signifiant and not difference simpliciter. The 'deeming' is not biological but social and political.

Qwex

StreetlghtX. TheMadFool presents a sound argument. There's nothing to your racelessness that isn't in 'gender identity' - we've seen all weakness of man in that category.

Some people are born less fortunate than others, by your logic, we ignore this and call the fortunate and the unfortunate, equal. Valid differences can be, and are registered.

Streetlight

↪Qwex

I didn't say race doesn't exist so I don't know what you're talking about.

Qwex

I don't think racism is only about insulting differences, but instating that these differences exist.

Are you sure people who claim to be victims of racism, aren't just victims of racist bullying?

Call me White, I don't care; call me a Bad White, I'll take it on the head. I think racism can be out of control, as with racist slavery, but, generally, it's not as severe enough, to shout or cry if the topic is brought up.

Baden

↪TheMadFool

You're not identifying the roots of racism or offering any explanation for it. You're only identifying some basic biological faculties that serve as necessary but insufficient conditions for it. It's like trying to explain the popularity of jogging by pointing out that people have legs.

Streetlight

↪Qwex

Still have no idea what you're on about.

Harry Hindu

Still have no idea what you're on about. — StreetlightX

This doesn't follow at all, and it also happens to have the effect of attempting to naturalize racism, rather than recognizing it for the political phenomenon that it is. What matters is not difference simipliciter - there are as many differences between me and my daughter as there are between me and my other-raced friend - but differences deemeed significant or relevant in one way and not another. It's somewhat embarrasing that this needs to be said. — StreetlightX

You're the one that doesn't know what they are talking about. Your daughter shares 50% of your genes compared others of a different race in which you share less. If this wasn't the case, then those genealogy commercials are a load of shit. How can they determine where your ancestors are from if we all share the same amount of similarities and differences?

Kin selection is the evolutionary strategy that favours the reproductive success of an organism's relatives, even at a cost to the organism's own survival and reproduction. Kin altruism can look like altruistic behaviour whose evolution is driven by kin selection.

Sure, culture plays a roll, but like I've said in the gender discussions, cultures can't make make rules for the differences if the differences didn't exist in reality. The problem is that cultures are placing people in boxes for which their skin color or sex parts don't apply. They are category errors. The problem is making these differences cultural rather than biological. In other words the differences should only matter in biological/medical contexts, not cultural/political contexts.

Even something as basic as levels of aggression isn't encoded to a degree that can meaningfully override culture. — Baden

If only this were true, we'd have no one in prison for violent crimes like rape or murder.

fdrake

Gonna leave this here.

Edit: lots of the meat is in part 2.

Baden

If only this were true, we'd have no one in prison for violent crimes like rape or murder. — Harry Hindu

We're macro-scale here. Overall aggression levels in cultures vary for cultural not genetic reasons.

Streetlight

Your daughter shares 50% of your genes compared others of a different race in which you share less. — Harry Hindu

I didn't say genetic differences, so thank you for your otherwise entirely useless reply.

frank

↪StreetlightX

Probably everything we are including culture emerges from biology.

In turn, culture acts as a filter on our potential, amplifying this, suppressing that.

This dance of being selected and then exerting a powerful influence over environmemtal conditions is played out repeatedly in the deep history of life. Life takes the environment in its hands and shapes it, in effect shaping itself. Culture is an example of that.

Right?

Streetlight

↪frank

I'm not interested in having a biology vs. culture debate. The claim in the OP is that the mere fact of being able to recognize difference implies that racism is 'primal'. That's an incredibly dumb inference for reasons I pointed out.

Harry Hindu

I'm not interested in having a biology vs. culture debate. The claim in the OP is that the mere fact of being able to recognize difference implies that racism is 'primal'. That's an incredibly dumb inference for reasons I pointed out. — StreetlightX

Like I said, you can't make rules for the differences if the differences didn't exist prior to the rules.

You need to recognize differences before making rules for them. The rules would not exist if we couldn't recognize the differences first.

RegularGuy

↪Harry Hindu

Racism is a result of a faulty inference from an individual to a group. “A Muslim blew himself up in a church. Muslims are bad.” Demagogues are mostly to blame for racism imho.

180 Proof

I'm not trying to justify or naturalize racism; all I'm offering here is a biological explanation for it.
— TheMadFool

You're not offering shit. Racism is premised on differences deemed signifiant and not difference simpliciter. The 'deeming' is not biological but social and political. — StreetlightX

:clap:

↪TheMadFool

You're not identifying the roots of racism or offering any explanation for it. You're only identifying some basic biological faculties that serve as necessary but insufficient conditions for it. It's like trying to explain the popularity of jogging by pointing out that people have legs. — Baden

:lol: :up:

... Biologizing the 'theory & practice' of biologizing - reduction of acculturation to bare biology - is vapidly circular, Fool.
— 180 Proof

It [may be] vapid but it isn't circular. — TheMadFool

Splitting the difference, huh? That's "mighty white" of you, Fool; it's patently circular, however, by your own admission of "offering a biological explanation for it" (re: "racism" - which consists in reducing members of a 'designated Out-Group' to their biology (e.g. skin, hair or eye color 'different' from that of members of the In-Group)). Res ipsa loquitur, kemosabe ... :meh:

TheMadFool

You're not offering shit. Racism is premised on differences deemed signifiant and not difference simpliciter. The 'deeming' is not biological but social and political. — StreetlightX

Splitting the difference, huh? That's "mighty white" of you, Fool; it's patently circular, however, by your own admission of "offering a biological explanation for it" (re: "racism" - which consists in reducing members of a 'designated Out-Group' to their biology (e.g. skin, hair or eye color 'different' from that of members of the In-Group)). Res ipsa loquitur, kemosabe ... :meh: — 180 Proof

StreetlightX and 180 Proof have a dekko at what Baden wrote below. 180 Proof, you understood the meaning because you replied with :lol: :up:

Thanks Baden & StreetlightX.

You're not identifying the roots of racism or offering any explanation for it. You're only identifying some basic biological faculties that serve as necessary but insufficient conditions for it. It's like trying to explain the popularity of jogging by pointing out that people have legs. — Baden

To say the very least, I've identified a necessary condition for racism - the ability to see differences.
If I remember my logic correctly, causes are classified as sufficient, necessary, sufficient & necessary, proximate, remote and contributory. Logic dictates that if one wants to produce an effect, one is advised to look for sufficient causes and if one wants to prevent/stop an effect, it's better to remove necessary causes. Ergo if we want to stop/prevent racism we should look for a necessary condition and remove it from society and we've come to an agreement, thanks to Baden, that the ability to see differences is most definitely a necessary cause for racism. Therefore, we've established, as a necessary condition and ergo a good place to begin racism prevention, the ability to see differences as the root of racism.

There is an issue with this "strategy" to prevent racism because the ability to see differences is necessary, along with the ability to see similarities which itself is necessary to make sense of the world - categorization/classification of objects, an essential for understanding our world, rely on similarities and differences. So, eliminating the ability to see differences is undesirable.

Here I'd like to refer you back to what I said about how the ability to see differences is linked to prey or predator which evokes a sense of right/dominion over or feelings of dread respectively. It's this automatic, subconscious connection we make between differences and a right to dominate over or perceive as a threat that is both a necessary & sufficient condition for racism. Tackling this problem is much more reasonable than trying to completely eliminate the ability to see differences which I've shown is necessary for other critical aspects of living, not to mention escaping predators and capturing prey.

One more thing...I don't understand how racism is political and/social. Europe before the slave trade had social and political divisions but these surely can't be termed as racism. Racism is about race and race is based, not on politics or social structure, but on biological differences.

Streetlight

↪TheMadFool

I'd advise you to look at the video that @fdrake posted. You're writing on things you seem quite ignorant about and you ought to inform yourself before speaking further.

180 Proof

I don't understand how racism is political and/social. — TheMadFool

Ergo: What @StreetlightX said ...

TheMadFool

I'd advise you to look at the video that fdrake posted. You're writing on things you seem quite ignorant about and you ought to inform yourself before speaking further. — StreetlightX

Ergo: What StreetlightX said ... — 180 Proof

I watched video. @fdrake posted, Many thanks to him. The author basically claims that the concept of race is arbitrary and so lacks a sound rational basis. The author makes a good argument by showing that human genotype can be understood as a genotype continuum, and possesses as many points where a division can be made as one fancies; this makes race an arbitrary concept. Ergo, if we must analyze race ~~biologically~~ genetically, then there's no clear point on the genotype continuum where a logically valid line for race can be drawn. Good argument.

However, what I've tried to do is explain the cause of racism, which I still think is grounded in our well-honed ability to see differences. I'm not claiming in any way that racism is validated by biology which the video is opposed to and I fully agree on that. The very notion of trying to explain that race is a biologically empty categorization depends on revealing sameness between peoples, as the author of the video has attempted using genetics, which vindicates my position that racism is based on seeing differences and the ability to see differences is a necessary survival skill, subject to selection pressure and thus likely to be highly developed and dominantly expressed in us, resulting in our propensity to discriminate against what doesn't look like us.

Streetlight

↪TheMadFool

I'm going to keep repeating this until it seeps into your head: Racism is premised on differences deemed signifiant and not difference simpliciter. The 'deeming' is not biological but social and political.

frank

However, what I've tried to do is explain the cause of racism, which I still think is grounded in our well-honed ability to see differences. — TheMadFool

If racism prevention is the goal, people could be encouraged to be aware of how they feel about differences. Give space to feeling uncomfortable.

Not realizing that the discomfort is coming from an aesthetic clash can feed scapegoating and other causes of racism.

Roots of Racism

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions