> homogeneity in the Scandinavian countries as a major source of their cohesiveness and ultimately happiness....largely white
Happy by what standard? There is no such fact as race. And innate ideas are the absurdity of knowing reality prior to knowing reality. Why for what or whom is cohesiveness good?
> homogeneity in the Scandinavian countries as a major source of their cohesiveness and ultimately happiness....largely white
Happy by what standard? There is no such fact as race. And innate ideas are the absurdity of knowing reality prior to knowing reality. Why for what or whom is cohesiveness good?
Well, they are all Scandinavian. I spent some time barhopping w/a Norwegian blond. She liked Sambucca and coffee beans. I like to group people by whether they have a focused or unfocused mind. I find value in that. How about yourself?
The definition of happiness is what BC discussed in his recap - there are metrics to measure this, which he accepts. I would argue that tribal affiliations are ingrained in our evolutionary makeup, and allow (demand) for the members of the tribe to act in accordance with the cultural norms of that tribe, including putting group membership often ahead of individual impulse. This is what makes for better social conditions, IMHO.
And, yet, curiously, very curiously, you dont tell us.
> tribal affiliations are ingrained in our evolutionary makeup
Man has free will to focus or evade focusing his mind. This is known by common human experience, not science. Evolution stopped w/mans free will mind because that is the most powerful method for mans life. You rationalize the cowardly sacrifice of independent judgment to social approval. Better social conditions protect and reward mans free will mind.
Incoherent, scientifically illiterate nonsense. Just as "race" doesn't exist (as good science), race denialism is equally bad science. Gene pools matter. Classical liberalism only appeared 1,000 years ago in the outbred gene pool in NW Europe. Inbred gene pools are never classically liberal, with high-social-trust institutions such as formal/constitutional law, they are always clannish and low trust.
See Samuel Bowles' 2008 Ulam Lectures, Santa Fe Institute.
Yes, Im a Rand fetishist. Ive grown weary of statistical studies of emotions posing as science.
Have you ever considered science as the product of a focused mind? As bluesman, Johhny Winter almost sang it,"Realitys out there,babe, its sneakin' up on ya Its gonna git ya wherever you go.
>"race" doesn't exist (as good science), race denialism is equally bad science.
If you mess up your mind w/contraadictions, it will respond w/demons.
Materialism is a rationalization of (1) the evasion of the mind, focused or unfocused; and (2) a hidden acceptance of the pre-scientific mind/body spllt. Mystics and materialists each accept and reject different sides of the split. Materialism is science like a whore is a wife.
Everything you have said so far is muddled gibberish and a PROJECTION of your mental dysfunction. Waste of time. You think you understand science, but you obviously don't because you do not appear to be capable of anything other than lazy, slobbery generalizations.
Is that science after its been shredded in a materialist meatgrinder? My grandmother made delicious chopped liver w/a meatgrinder. And Canters Deli in LA on Fairfax Av also serves thick chopped liver sandwiches to the hipsters after the clubs close at 2AM.
> homogeneity in the Scandinavian countries as a major source of their cohesiveness and ultimately happiness....largely white
Happy by what standard? There is no such fact as race. And innate ideas are the absurdity of knowing reality prior to knowing reality. Why for what or whom is cohesiveness good?
Replace “race” with “set of closely related tribes”.
The various Scandinavian countries will all tell you how very different they are from each other. Does that mean there is no value in grouping them?
Well, they are all Scandinavian. I spent some time barhopping w/a Norwegian blond. She liked Sambucca and coffee beans. I like to group people by whether they have a focused or unfocused mind. I find value in that. How about yourself?
The definition of happiness is what BC discussed in his recap - there are metrics to measure this, which he accepts. I would argue that tribal affiliations are ingrained in our evolutionary makeup, and allow (demand) for the members of the tribe to act in accordance with the cultural norms of that tribe, including putting group membership often ahead of individual impulse. This is what makes for better social conditions, IMHO.
>happiness...metrics to measure this
And, yet, curiously, very curiously, you dont tell us.
> tribal affiliations are ingrained in our evolutionary makeup
Man has free will to focus or evade focusing his mind. This is known by common human experience, not science. Evolution stopped w/mans free will mind because that is the most powerful method for mans life. You rationalize the cowardly sacrifice of independent judgment to social approval. Better social conditions protect and reward mans free will mind.
Incoherent, scientifically illiterate nonsense. Just as "race" doesn't exist (as good science), race denialism is equally bad science. Gene pools matter. Classical liberalism only appeared 1,000 years ago in the outbred gene pool in NW Europe. Inbred gene pools are never classically liberal, with high-social-trust institutions such as formal/constitutional law, they are always clannish and low trust.
See Samuel Bowles' 2008 Ulam Lectures, Santa Fe Institute.
Are you a Rand fetishist. or similar?
Yes, Im a Rand fetishist. Ive grown weary of statistical studies of emotions posing as science.
Have you ever considered science as the product of a focused mind? As bluesman, Johhny Winter almost sang it,"Realitys out there,babe, its sneakin' up on ya Its gonna git ya wherever you go.
>"race" doesn't exist (as good science), race denialism is equally bad science.
If you mess up your mind w/contraadictions, it will respond w/demons.
Rand cultists, like all cultists, are sociopathic, emotional manipulators.
Your rationalization of intellectual cowardice as response to social disapproval is noted.
There is EXACTLY NOTHING that you have said that is either "focused" or "scientific".
ZERO.
Troll.
Materialism is a rationalization of (1) the evasion of the mind, focused or unfocused; and (2) a hidden acceptance of the pre-scientific mind/body spllt. Mystics and materialists each accept and reject different sides of the split. Materialism is science like a whore is a wife.
This is simple:
BOTH the pro-race faction AND the anti-race ("race denier") faction are wrong, in different ways, about the science of human population genetics.
Your inability to think coherently, at a basic level, is a strong indicator that you are mentally dysfunctional.
You are a waste of time.
>wrong, in different ways
You evade identifying them, thus impossible to judge your claim.
Everything you have said so far is muddled gibberish and a PROJECTION of your mental dysfunction. Waste of time. You think you understand science, but you obviously don't because you do not appear to be capable of anything other than lazy, slobbery generalizations.
Agreed, in the context of the unfocused mind.
What do you mean by “there is no such fact as race”?
There is no Bigfoot, no aliens in flying saucers, no Santa Claus, no God, no Devil. However, I lived in LA and Berzerkly so I know theyre real.
That is a scientifically illiterate response. No surprise.
Is that science after its been shredded in a materialist meatgrinder? My grandmother made delicious chopped liver w/a meatgrinder. And Canters Deli in LA on Fairfax Av also serves thick chopped liver sandwiches to the hipsters after the clubs close at 2AM.
more incoherent blather.
Coherence requires the mind evaded in materialism. Youre trying to get high without having to pay.
Can you define race?
The better question is, how was "race" defined in the past, and what was scientifically true and false about that past definition.
Additionally, how is "race denial" ideology both scientifically true in some ways, but false in others?