posted
Good point on the race question. It's like a magnet I guess.
That said, some members need to look in the mirror while discussing Egypt with all the bickering with what constitutes black.
My issue never has been whether Egypt was black at one time in its past. Mine is simply how all world-wide phenotypic expression evolved from a single group of humans in Africa to produce the tremendous variation we see today. My position, contrary to what some here may want to believe, has nothing, nothing to do with eurocentrism as I am a black American.
From what I understand codominance in allele expression is just what it says, no expression dominates the other. So how is it recessive phenotype alleles can be anywhere near this equation? In other words in order for recessive types to come about there has to be a mixing of the gene pool. Genetic drift, variation and mutation have nothing to do with it my view. Of course a PhD in genetics will say that's how it happened yet offering no compelling truth to how this business came into play, all the while using a number of qualifiers, e.g., ''it may be that'', or, ''it could have happened'', or ''it probably did happen'', maintaining political correctness for everyone and solving nothing. At the same time other PhDs as a rebuttle, in the same discipline will say ''it is very unlikely'' or ''the chance is astronomical'. And on and on it goes.
Where does this leave me. It seems plausible to me that there may have been other groups scattered throughout the earth, with origins independent of Africa even though the fossil record says no (I think). Otherwise it looks like this site is stuck with a creationist-type model of all humankind.
Finally, how many times doe one have to prove Ancient Egypt was Black?
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
The source of literacy in Europe is not indigenous. Recall that writing, reading, reflective thought began with the civilisations of Ancient Egypt-Kush and Mesopotamia. The Greeks acquired literacy and reflective thinking from the Ancient Egyptians and others like the Babylonians.
If we assume that the Greeks were Europeans--some see them though as a predominantly Eurasian(I have even read books that referred to the Greeks as "Orientals"--then it follows that the Greeks learned(hence there must have been tachers) their reading and writing skills from Africans and West Asians.
But even today in Europe and other places of European settlement very few people read books(I include the Christian Bible) so the business of keeping the flame alive is left to the intellectual classes--found mainly at universities aand reserach centres.
Proof: the vast majority of English people would rather prefer to buy a simple book with lots of pictures on a silly, intellectually low-wattage airhead like "Lady" Diana than a serious book on the life of Shakespeare or Isaac Newton.
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Lamin wrote: ''Proof: the vast majority of English people would rather prefer to buy a simple book with lots of pictures on a silly, intellectually low-wattage airhead like "Lady" Diana than a serious book on the life of Shakespeare or Isaac Newton.'
It sure looks that way.
I see the absence of wonder all the time on television, e.g., ''What is Paris Hilton up to today and what kind of car does she drive.'' I can see this Paris thing if it was on Inside Edition or some other type show, but the local and national news? No wonder looks of bewilderment cross the average person's face when you ask them something historical.
You can't blame the stations I guess, they're afraid of losing their viewership. They take their lessons quite well from Stringer and Povich.
Posts: 2118 | From: midwest, USA | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Grumman f6f: ...Finally, how many times doe one have to prove Ancient Egypt was Black?
A very good question. Apparently the answer lies on the person or persons one is trying to prove it to. For those who are too caught up or rather submerged in Eurocentrism and white supremacy of course, there can be never enough times.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
What I mean by cultural transmition is NOT that intelligence is transmitted from a people to a people,
but it's like lamin said alot earlier, one's culture dtermines their intelligence.
I thought I had made an in-depth replay earlier, but I guess it's not here.
By the way, I subscribe to there being multiple intelligences that one can be good at.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}: but it's like lamin said alot earlier, one's culture dtermines their intelligence.
I hate to bring this thread up again, but as to the premise above, would there not be a circular reason?-- that intelligence also determines one's culture. (?) Then again, environment is also a major factor.
Human beings like all animals have spent a great deal of their existence using their intelligence mainly for survival.
Posts: 26252 | From: Atlanta, Georgia, USA | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah, intelligence would, and maybe moreso the way you think, but other factors would as well, such as environment as you noted, and whether one is one who takes initiative( unlike me), or is conformist, nonconformist, or just plain original (like me).
What I'm said was, if the collective culture one is a part of is somehow more intelligent or sophisticated,
I think the individual in question will more likely possess intelligent traits.
Oh! I'll post my site later, about what I mean by multiple intelligences.
Posts: 5555 | From: Tha 5th Dimension. | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Willing Thinker {What Box}: but it's like lamin said alot earlier, one's culture dtermines their intelligence.
I hate to bring this thread up again, but as to the premise above, would there not be a circular reason?-- that intelligence also determines one's culture. (?) Then again, environment is also a major factor.
Human beings like all animals have spent a great deal of their existence using their intelligence mainly for survival.
I doubt intelligence determines culture.
quote:Originally posted by Grumman f6f: Right out of the gate I think what is important is when quoting to bolster one's argument that person should keep paragraph context/continuity in mind.
When I said this:
''Well how is it I can challenge sporting facts?''
Willing Thinker then said: ''If by “facts” you mean stats.''
Then in the same breath you say: Who’s denying sporting stats?''
If your intent is to argue statistics then do so in context, not in this argument. You set yourself up to win an argument without my participation.
Actually, when you said "sporting facts", that was your intention.
The purpose of most discourse here, and debate elsewhere, is to prove one's point regardless of who participates. Unless one just wants to converse on and on...
Just curious, aside from sporting statistics, did your 'facts' comprise of any thing else, like something that may actually be in contention to my stance?
Something I might be interested in? Perhaps a study showing that in any population the correlation between atheletic success is overwelmingly with genes, moreso than anything else?
My stance, for those unsure:
Significant stance point no. 1:
*Different populations have differing percentages of certain genes affecting their bodies, physical build, mobility, and of course, anything else possibly concerning the atheletic.
Lamin has noted on other pages that pacific asian black populations seem to perform similarly in sports in Africans. To me, perhaps this is because of common genes that have been lost or shrunk in terms of number in a population with those genes.
S.S.P. no# 2
Cultural, environment, and social aspects of life sure can contribute a good output of any ethnicity into the athletic field.
Didn't Jews used to be better at whites in basketball (and still are at my old school), but are now somehow stereotyped as being richer, and having weakier slower, but just as financially inclined offspring?
[RANT warning]**************8
Why do you think I made the comments I made on tha other page/s? What do you think one would think, when they went to a school they watched go from white/jew some arabs, blacks to black white mixed,
observed the differences in lifestyle of the said school (pre, middle, and high)
contrasted with the lifestyles of his friends and people in "tha hood"?
Seriously, were talkin going from an social/academic based place, with many other well balanced aspects including success in sports (two of which I played - yes, many black children were a part of it, but there were three super-exceptional white kids in terms of stereotypes, one of which, specifically an italian german american friend of mine who would have made you reconsider your genetic argument)
to a place [tha ghetto] based in the black social aspects of life, and pretty much FOCUSED exclusively on becomming skilled as an entertainer (either, sports, dancing (by the way I gotta show you a sweet video), singing, or otherwise) for social, or profession purposes.
Those things are cool in all, but we are looking at my brethren all fighting to find a couple needles in a hay stack, a hay stack they have to find barried in a desert similar to the sahara in size
only for the ones that do make it to stardome see a ignorant post on their youtube video about "we [whites] are [some how] supporting ignorant ungrateful black americans with their athletic abilities by watching them [oh, really, and your fanatical arses aren't just getting your selves some ent'ainment, huh massas?
[end /RANT WARNING]
Also, don't call me an egalitarian, when many of those who agree with this view (laymen) assert their reason for such is the fact that
'everybody has to have somethin their good at, for some, it's some things, for others, there are other things'
whites are smart, blacks are strong, asians are good copiers etc (and other unstabely based balogna).
I have not asserted every 'white' to be equal to every 'black' in all things; so don't get to twistin.
PS: I posted my multiple intelligences info. in another thread.
One thing that is obvious from all this is:
the bankrupt notion of a 'biological 'race'' dichotomy of the human species sure has confused the mess out of a host of people, and the funny thing is: it didn't even confuse it's old propagators from back in tha day, who didn't even believe in it (seemed to know of it's biological invalidity).
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
: I have quotes from Hitler.)![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic