The rest of my post explains.Please explain. A simple statement, merely your opinion will not do.
Ok, I think. Therefore we use the word race to mean breed - not nationality, ethnicity, religion or anything else - as I have been saying all along.We've already agreed that, types, etnicities, religions, even races or breeds, if you like.
But we can only use 'race' if it is the socially constructed concept of race because science has proven that there is only one human race. Therefore you cannot divide the human race into different races in a biological, scientific sense.
We don't use 'breed' for reasons explained yesterday. Race is used for humans, and breed is used for animals.
But it doesn't matter how many breeds of cats there are they are still all cats. That will never change.
It doesn't matter how many distinct groups humans can be sub-divided into whatever word you choose to use, they will still be humans, and that will never change.
It would appear I have persuaded you.
Why do you keep saying they are still cats - or still people? We know that and no one has disputed it. It is obvious.
I don't. It's you and Bas who keep wanting scientific reasons.If you insist that the human race is sub-divided into scientifically based, biologically based different classifications, you are ascribing to the outdated
It just means the obvious and not nationality, ethnicity or religion etc.
I don't know exactly what Darwin said, but what you have written Is not racist.Darwinian notion that the human race sub-divided into different 'races' some time in the distant past. That is a fundamental racist ideology because it argues that there are biological differences which predetermine the abilities, characteristics and traits.
Kangaroos can't climb trees; so what; it's no disgrace.
No it isn't.If abilities, characteristics and traits are predetermined, then that is a racist ideology.
Pygmies can't reach the top shelf; so what; it's no disgrace.
Sounds to me like you are the racist one.