Don't get me wrong, I do believe that Iran shouldn’t have nuclear weapons..

morqthana said:
So just to clarify - you refuse to believe a single thing in the Wikipedia article?
Click to expand...
Open Editing: The core principle of Wikipedia allows almost anyone to edit articles, which can lead to vandalism or the insertion of false information.

I need stonewall information please.

More stones less walls please.
 
morqthana said:
Hardly news - we all know that nobody is born a racist, they all have to be taught to be one.
Click to expand...
Not so. It's significant in our epigenetics. Look up histones, methylation etc etc etc.
Protectionism of our family/village/tribe/country is innate, via evolution, for survival.
It's part of inheritance, eg the way the learned behaviour of Pavlov's dogs is heritable. The puppies react to the bell, and so do their puppies.
The dna stays constant, but gene activity patterns can be inherited, affecting behaviour, - and more, such as phenotypic plasticity,

In other words it would be unnatural not to be racist.
2000 word essay on my desk by 9 a.m., ok?
 
Last edited:
Justin Passing said:
Not so. It's significant in our epigenetics. Look up histones, methylation etc etc etc.
Protectionism of our family/village/tribe/country is innate, via evolution, for survival.
It's part of inheritance, eg the way the learned behaviour of Pavlov's dogs is heritable. The puppies react to the bell, and so do their puppies.
The dna stays constant, but gene activity patterns can be inherited, affecting behaviour, - and more, such as phenotypic plasticity,

In other words it would be unnatural not to be racist.
2000 word essay on my desk by 9 a.m., ok?
Click to expand...
Prejudice is not inheritable. It's a learning process.
Children are not inherently prejudiced, they're taught to be that way by their peers. They follow the examples set by their peers.

The gullibility of a person is possibly heritable, but not the particular prejudices.
Based on psychological and behavioral genetics research, prejudice is not considered a directly inherited, single-gene trait. However, it is heritable in the sense that certain personality traits, cognitive styles, and biological predispositions that make an individual more prone to prejudice can be passed down genetically.
Click to expand...
So while it may be a heritable process of belonging to 'the tribe', it's a learning process of which particular tribe you associate with.

For example, and I think there may be instances in the Bible and in folklore of swapping sons between families, as a way of removing prejudice, if a child was taken at a young age and transposed into another 'tribe', they would learn the prejudice of that new tribe, not the prejudices of the old tribe.
If their hereditary gullibility was resistant to such learned prejudice, they could reject the prejudice of both tribes.
So it's all down to how gullible a person is to learned prejudice. And the gullibility factor is probably hereditary, but not the specific prejudices.



I think I met the deadline, but not the verbosity that you requested.
I think I explained it in much fewer words than you would have expected, about 180 I'm guessing.
 
Elsa TLC said:
Open Editing: The core principle of Wikipedia allows almost anyone to edit articles, which can lead to vandalism or the insertion of false information.

I need stonewall information please.

More stones less walls please.
Click to expand...

morqthana said:
So are you unaware of, or in denial of, the fact that Wikipedia articles may not contain original research?

Tell you what - try editing that article, deleting all the text in that section and replacing it with "there is no evidence that Candace Owens has ever made antisemitic remarks".

See how long your edit survives.
Click to expand...

If he's using his argument to not build a wall he must be making a path...and leading you along.

Enjoy your journey to nowhere.
 
King Billy said:
Prejudice is not inheritable. It's a learning process.
Children are not inherently prejudiced, they're taught to be that way by their peers. They follow the examples set by their peers.

The gullibility of a person is possibly heritable, but not the particular prejudices.

So while it may be a heritable process of belonging to 'the tribe', it's a learning process of which particular tribe you associate with.

For example, and I think there may be instances in the Bible and in folklore of swapping sons between families, as a way of removing prejudice, if a child was taken at a young age and transposed into another 'tribe', they would learn the prejudice of that new tribe, not the prejudices of the old tribe.
If their hereditary gullibility was resistant to such learned prejudice, they could reject the prejudice of both tribes.
So it's all down to how gullible a person is to learned prejudice. And the gullibility factor is probably hereditary, but not the specific prejudices.
Click to expand...

It was the tried and trusted method of royal families throughout history to marry their children into rival families to create a link between them, in an effort to avoid conflict and division. Not that it worked very well, but the effort was made. These days it's all about creating a narrative to exploit that division and sow the seeds of further conflict in order to generate more business opportunities for arms dealers and carpetbaggers.

King Billy said:
I think I met the deadline, but not the verbosity that you requested.
I think I explained it in much fewer words than you would have expected, about 180 I'm guessing.
Click to expand...
 
Odds said:
If he's using his argument to not build a wall he must be making a path...and leading you along.

Enjoy your journey to nowhere.
Click to expand...

They know they are not getting anywhere, but still flog that dead horse.

You have a stable full of replacement horses, very wise, but think of their welfare.
Thst said your being very wise in the advance you give to your frauds.
 
King Billy said:
I think I met the deadline, but not the verbosity that you requested.
I think I explained it in much fewer words than you would have expected, about 180 I'm guessing.
Click to expand...
You didn't add much -bearing in mind I deliberately said "significant", and not "the only".
You've made a number of assertions which are highly subjective, and challengable.
- One can look at what "racism" really is, and what and how we choose to include in any such "ism",
- or the way just as an example, that in a troop of primates one born albino is usually killed by a troop member.
It's easy to drop into a trope that anything one chooses to be bad, or good, must therefore be caused by one thing or another. It's not so simple.
- Prejudice is in part, quite reasonably, borne of previous evidence.
- Cats are not taught be fear snakes, but they do.
- To what extent is adoption or rejection of "wokery" brought to bear in the subjective judgements?

Based on psychological and behavioral genetics research, prejudice is not considered a directly inherited, single-gene trait.
Click to expand...
Yeah I know, but that is penned by someone seriously skewed. It's stongly tendentious to imply any relevance to monogenecity.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top