Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progression

  1. #1
    Keeps your Whites Whiter.
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SuuT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Subrace
    SkandoNordid/Nordicised Faelid
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic MeritAristocracy
    Religion
    Heiðinn
    Posts
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progression

    ”I have been able to prove to myself over the years, in actual legal cases, that I am more accurate at assessing race from skeletal remains than from looking at living people standing before me. So those of us in forensic anthropology know that the skeleton reflects race, whether "real" or not, just as well if not better than superficial soft tissue does. The idea that race is "only skin deep" is simply not true, as any experienced forensic anthropologist will affirm” (George W. Gill: Professor of anthropology at the University of Wyoming. He also serves as the forensic anthropologist for Wyoming law-enforcement agencies and the Wyoming State Crime Laboratory.).




    What follows is an informal outline of the philosophical, and extended problems/questions/issues of realistic applications, as well as implications, of the Theory of Racial Progressiveness. I would like very much for all of us with interest in the matter to participate, and contribute, in a manner in which we might dovetail the Theory, as it stands (if this is shown to be possible), with an eventual end aim of scholarship that can be referenced and cited in the future; while, at the same time, proceeding in a ‘disinterested’ manner (disinterested does not mean uninterested) lest we find ourselves in the position of racial Truisms: we must find out, first, whether or not the theory—as it stands—can stand alone i.e. “are the answers to the philosophical, and scientific, problems with the theory already contained within the theory, itself; or, and if not, what must be altered, and to what qualitative and/or quantitative degree, to have not only an internal self-consistency, but an applicability beyond what is True for a particular group”. This, of course, is itself processed by an assumption: specifically, that the Science and Philosophy of Racial Progressiveness must extend beyond the Europiform. This is one of the assumptions, amongst many, that we must deconstruct so as to expand not only the degree to which the theory is convincing; but also the degree to which the theory can be said to be advantageous, and (perhaps most importantly) for whom.

    The best way to proceed in such a philosophical analysis is to first take the antithetical side of what we recognise as True by conviction, if not instinct; preponderance of evidence that falls in favor of an advantageous theory for a particular group; as well as proactively anticipating the arguments of those for whom the Theory of Racial Progressiveness is not advantageous. Preemptive preparation is key to any tactical advantage; it is, also, key to identifying where the holes in our theories might induce a hemorrhage if wheedled at. In short, we must make it as hard as is possible on ourselves with respect to this theory. By that act alone, we become prepared for inevitable arguments against it by groups for whom the theory proves detrimental; we become aware to the disadvantageousness of the theory, if it is so; and, simultaneously, provide an internal buffer of understanding and protection for those of whom, within the Germanic family, that are not – as is obvious – going to toss-up their hands to the notion that they are less Hominised/Progressive than their Nordiform kin if the theory is, indeed, sound.

    Again, this outline is both informal and proleptic: please do add more to it is you feel that something has not been touched on.

    I.) Non-Nordiform Sub-Racial Resentment, and the Ideological Divide Probability



    Let us take the theory as True: Homonisation not only exists at the Racial level; but we can track how this occurs, and who and what is an exemplar of Racial Progressiveness. Skipping ahead (we might need to stop here, and discuss what follows: for now, I am assuming that everyone understands that – within the theory – Nordiform = more Hominised), the logical conclusion to the theory is that the Nordiform represents the current apex of Hominisation: The phenotypically ‘pure’ (a word that we will likely need to unpack) Nordid, himself, representing the progenitor of the Peak Type of Homo sapiens development; and is, therefore, the “ought” that is to be presented to a/the Racialist (perhaps beyond these confines) as to what concerns not only preservation of the Germanic – but also, what will raise the Nordid sub-race, and consequently the Germanic – En Toto - as the general preeminence of Homonisation, to an even higher biological/psychometric (assuming a difference) plane, via Eugenics and Euthenics within the broader Europid apex if it can, indeed, be said that Europiform man is, generally, the most hominised.


    A.) Questions/Problems to Consider

    1.) Does this not automatically make non-Nordiform individuals “others” within the context of the greater Germanic family?
    2.) What are the odds, by way of nothing other than common sense, that Racial Progression will be accepted and cultivated by non-Nordics when the theory dictates that they are, literally, of less objective value in not only the preservation; but also the advancement of Germanics as a whole?
    3.) Does the theory spell the eventual end of other Europid sub-races, and even variations within other Europid sub-races if it is True, and consequently institutionally advocated and employed in the service of ‘the greater/est good for the greater/est number’ in some future within the Germanic family? Why? Why not? I.e. Does the theory, or does the theory not, suppose or presuppose an ipso facto elitism in favour of the Nordiform? Is this tenable? Is it not a contradiction to suppose or presuppose an elite specific morphology, that represents an apex of Homonisation; and then expect those not falling into these parameters to do ‘the greater good’ implied by the “oughts” of the theory (e.g. “…traits x, y, and z are now, and have been, advantageous to the preservation and advancement of Europid [and other, even extra-European morphological] man. However, you do not possess them, and ought to sacrifice yourself, perhaps the entire variant of which you are a phenotypic member, to the principle of Homonisation for the sake of greater Racial Progressiveness within the group…”)
    4.) Does the theory, as it stands, account for the gifts that (particular) non-Nordiform individuals and groups have made to the general advancement of the (greater) group?
    5.) En Summa Fragmentation: Already existing within the Racist/Racialist cosmos are ‘Nordicists’ and ‘Medicists’ and ‘Sudacists’. All of which proceed, in one way or another, from the perspective that their subs and variants (although all do not utilise this vernacular) represent the definitive “ought” of Racialist thought and worldview. Does the theory of Racial Progression simply not replace the variables within the Medish schema, and the Sudish schema, with Nordish variables/values – thereby, contrasting the same internal consistency as seen in the “I and mine are ‘superior’ because of (insert self-consistent variable[s] here)” - of other elitisms? E.g. The “Nation of Islam” espouses a superiority of the Black/Negrid: is there any generic structural crossover in the argumentation that abstractly relates to the theory of Racial Progression? If so, what is it? What does this say about (biological or other) elitisms both generally and particularly?

    What does this say for an already, definitively, deviant ideology and world view? I.e. Racialism/Racism?

    Does the theory unite, or divide intra-Europa? How? Why? In what ways? Is the reasoning and ratiocination of the theory inductive or deductive? I.e. Does it know its desired conclusion, and build underneath this conclusion, that which is necessary to support it?

    What – if anything - vitiates the predictable, and probable, intra-racialism ideological divide inherent in the necessary aspect of Homonisation as related to the Theory of Racial Progressiveness? – If there are progressives; then there are non-progressives, even if speaking in relative terms. Therefore, within the Europid spectrum, as the theory currently stands, there are more Hominised, and less Hominised, members of the Europid Race: There is the slippery slope…



    II.) (Some of) The Relevant Science (most is not available on the web)




    1.) The overwhelming consensus of modern day science is that genetic (genotypic) race does not exist; however, phenotypic variation occurs and is, in contemporary academia, explicated the following way: genotype + environment + random mutation/variation = phenotype. In essence, phenotype, while governed by what is genotypically possible within a given environment, and tempered by random variation/mutation, does not constitute anything that can be said to be a definitive differentiation of genetic races.

    2.) There is no research in the scientific community correlating phenotypic varation to psychometrics in a way such that one can draw the conclusion that Race ‘x’ is more or less succeptible to psychological problem/advantage ‘a’. The research doesn’t exist.

    3.) For those of you who don’t know. Much of Agrippa’s terminology is gleaned from a man named Ernst Kretschmer.

    4.) The theory of Racial Progressiveness is replete with Lamarckian applications and assumptions: Jean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, Chevalier de Lamarck is used nowhere in biology in the manner he was prior to being debunked (and not just by jews) soon after the appearance of Mendelian Genetics. Where he is still applicable, this applicability has nothing to do with race, phenotypic or otherwise. Lamarckism is more generally used in the description and elucidation of memetic evolution.
















    How do these things affect the Theory?



    III.) The Ethics




    1.) I/We are more hominised; however, it does not matter: I/We recognise the inherent value of a polytypical species – we simply want to preserve ourselves.

    2.) I/We are more hominised; however, while this matters and I/we should, and will, consider pressing our rights as progressives (whatever those may be), we do not wish to harm you or yours – only to have what is ours (whatever that might be) peacefully.

    3.) I/We are more hominised; it follows that homocentrism dictates that we must pursue a “racial chauvinism” that places our interests above and beyond non-progressives. We will press our rights – even if this means by non-peaceful means, if that proves necessary.

    4.) I/We are more hominised: Genuflect.

    5.) Etc.


    If this thread develops, it his likely that I will play the role of the antagonist. Also, I will add more that will be fundamental to the analysis in the same event.
    "...The moral man is a lower species than the immoral, a weaker species; indeed - he is a type in regard to morality, but not a type in himself; a copy...the measure of his value lies outside him. ... I assess the power of a will by how much resistance, pain, torture it endures and knows how to turn to its advantage; I do not account the evil and painful character of existence a reproach to it, but hope rather that it will one day be more evil and painful than hitherto..." (Nietzsche)

  2. #2
    Member SubGnostic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    Monday, August 25th, 2008 @ 08:35 PM
    Location
    Kymenlaakso
    Gender
    Family
    Platonic love
    Religion
    Transhumanism
    Posts
    353
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progressi

    Unfortunately, I only have more questions than answers to provide for the time being.

    Yes, biology often is "fuzzy around the edges", but there are mutations that can be associated with certain populations/ethnies, some even explicitly (sickle cell anemia for example). Also, what do you deem as "relevant science"? How do you find the works of Richard Lynn, Frank Salter or Sarich and Miele?

  3. #3
    Keeps your Whites Whiter.
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SuuT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Subrace
    SkandoNordid/Nordicised Faelid
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic MeritAristocracy
    Religion
    Heiðinn
    Posts
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progressi

    Quote Originally Posted by SubGnostic View Post
    Unfortunately, I only have more questions than answers to provide for the time being.

    Firstly, I heap praise upon you for being the first brave soul to reply: I think many here are under the impression that Agrippa will bite those who poke at the theory - I don't think that that is the case: he is an objective man. I also think people are a little shy to ask questions about it, even though I know, for a fact, that there are more people who have questions than answers, which is good: that is exactly where we need to be at this point.

    Yes, biology often is "fuzzy around the edges", but there are mutations that can be associated with certain populations/ethnies, some even explicitly (sickle cell anemia for example).

    Can you expand on this? Does it tie into the Theory of Racial Progression?

    Also, what do you deem as "relevant science"? How do you find the works of Richard Lynn, Frank Salter or Sarich and Miele?

    Good question. Could you explain how the work of Lynn, Salter, Sarich and Miele affect the Theory?

    "...The moral man is a lower species than the immoral, a weaker species; indeed - he is a type in regard to morality, but not a type in himself; a copy...the measure of his value lies outside him. ... I assess the power of a will by how much resistance, pain, torture it endures and knows how to turn to its advantage; I do not account the evil and painful character of existence a reproach to it, but hope rather that it will one day be more evil and painful than hitherto..." (Nietzsche)

  4. #4
    Member SubGnostic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    Monday, August 25th, 2008 @ 08:35 PM
    Location
    Kymenlaakso
    Gender
    Family
    Platonic love
    Religion
    Transhumanism
    Posts
    353
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progressi

    II.) - 2.)

    Matt Ridley, a politically correct geneticist, writes thus in his book "Genome":

    Suppose you wished to breed a strain of fox or rat that was more tame and less instinctively timid than the average. One way to do so would be to pick the darkest pups in the litter as the stock for breeding the next generation. In a few years you would have tamer, and darker, animals. This curious fact has been known to animal breeders for many years. But in the 1980s it took on a new significance. It parallels another link between neurochemistry and personality in people. Jerome Kagan, a Harvard psychologist, leading a team of researchers studying shyness or confidence in children, found that he could identify unusually 'inhibited' types as early as four months of age - and fourteen years later could predict how shy or confident those same human beings would be as adults. Upbringing mattered a good deal. But intrinsic personality played just as big a role.
    Big deal. Nobody, except the most die-hard social determinist, would find an innate component of shyness surprising. But it turned out that the same personality traits correlated with some unexpected other features. Shy adolescents were more likely to be blue-eyed (all the subjects were of European descent), susceptible to allergies, tall and thin, narrow -faced, to have more heat-generating activity under the right forehead and a faster heartbeat, than the less shy individuals. All of these features are under the control of a particular set of cells in the embryo called the neural crest, from which a particular part of the brain, the amygdala, derives. They also all use the same neurotransmitter, called norepinephrine, a substance very like dopamine. All these features are also charasteristic of Northern Europeans, Nordic types for the most part.
    The research is there. But only in fragments, popping out of the professional circles to the public every now and then. Why? Because directing funds, time and attention straightforwardly to such studies means stepping into a political minefield.

    From what mister Ridley has provided, by going through psychological, criminal statistics, and by simply observing the people around you, you can shape psychometric profiles for different populations.

    The psychological characteristics of Nordics, as described above, could imply that being more introverted, such people woud be likely to pursue reserved and intellectual activities. This gives validity to the figures of body type-personality correlation Agrippa has posted.

    The reason why I took the aforementioned authors and their studies into account is because they work in similar fashion to what I have described, though on an interracial level, which might be less important to us.
    I'll try to make a proper assessment of these books as soon as I get the chance to actually read them.

    P.S:
    I don't expect that the reasoning of my early post-pubescent mind would strike as impressive to anyone. But I'll try.
    Last edited by SubGnostic; Saturday, November 18th, 2006 at 09:12 PM.

  5. #5
    Keeps your Whites Whiter.
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SuuT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Subrace
    SkandoNordid/Nordicised Faelid
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic MeritAristocracy
    Religion
    Heiðinn
    Posts
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progressi

    Quote Originally Posted by SubGnostic View Post
    II.) - 2.)

    ...
    The research is there. But only in fragments, popping out of the professional circles to the public every now and then. Why? Because directing funds, time and attention straightforwardly to such studies means stepping into a political minefield.

    Well, research that correlates personaility types, and their fixedness, and at what age, under what circumstances is there, yes.

    What might we do to enter the minefield (?); because, as you have demonstrated, there are studies that make implications that research is needed into the implications of race as related to psychometrics.

    From what mister Ridley has provided, by going through psychological, criminal statistics, and by simply observing the people around you, you can shape psychometric profiles for different populations.

    Undoubtedly. However, stats can be skewed and spun any number of ways, as I am sure you are aware; and our observations and subsequent psychometric profiles constructed must be contolled for, no? Or, and at the very least, we will be charged with subjectivity.

    The psychological characteristics of Nordics, as described above, could imply that being more introverted, such people woud be likely to pursue reserved and intellectual activities. This gives validity to the figures of body type-personality correlation Agrippa has posted.

    You mention of Introversion is important: Introversion is positively correlated with IQ as well as EQ. However, if we were to lay-out the individuals that have most shaped history (either those that have been preserved for posterity in stone; or those we have renderings or pictures of) do we find Nordics at the top of the intellectual strata? What of this Alpinid who, after over 2 millenia, still influences Science and Philosophy?: (Socrates)...

    The reason why I took the aforementioned authors and their studies into account is because they work in similar fashion to what I have described, though on an interracial level, which might be less important to us.
    I'll try to make a proper assessment of these books as soon as I get the chance to actually read them.

    Very much looking forward to it!

    P.S:
    I don't expect that the reasoning of my early post-pubescent mind would strike as impressive to anyone. But I'll try.

    I, for one, am impressed.
    "...The moral man is a lower species than the immoral, a weaker species; indeed - he is a type in regard to morality, but not a type in himself; a copy...the measure of his value lies outside him. ... I assess the power of a will by how much resistance, pain, torture it endures and knows how to turn to its advantage; I do not account the evil and painful character of existence a reproach to it, but hope rather that it will one day be more evil and painful than hitherto..." (Nietzsche)

  6. #6
    Member SubGnostic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    Monday, August 25th, 2008 @ 08:35 PM
    Location
    Kymenlaakso
    Gender
    Family
    Platonic love
    Religion
    Transhumanism
    Posts
    353
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progressi

    It's the childish attitude toward empirical studies of such nature, in the contemporary political climate, that creates the minefield. Even if dealt with utmost discretion, these studies, which the media maelstorm will surely tinge with an undertone of ideological and prejudiced motivation, can turn into biblical beasts in the eyes of the public. Needless to say this does not promote these sciences for further development. For the common, politically correct airhead this will always be subjective research. And as you've probably noticed, they are in no way susceptible to neglected ideas and when they run out of valid arguments, the trolling starts. So the basis of excercising the Theory must not be for the sake of the masses.

    However, stats can be skewed and spun any number of ways, as I am sure you are aware;
    Not entirely. At some point the numbers can't lie.

    However, if we were to lay-out the individuals that have most shaped history (either those that have been preserved for posterity in stone; or those we have renderings or pictures of) do we find Nordics at the top of the intellectual strata? What of this Alpinid who, after over 2 millenia, still influences Science and Philosophy?: (Socrates)...
    I'd suggest we hold to purely biological concepts and standpoints, at least for now. Stepping onto the cultural plane brings a great more deal of obscurity to the subject. Mainly because ancient European cultures, other than Greek and Roman, are subject to neglect as they are traditionally seen as primitive and incapable. Yet there has been found traces of civilization such as the Sky Disc of Nebra, and the Sun Temple in Saxony. One could argue that some Nordic populations lacked the environmental and social premises for higher culture. Scarce population being an obstacle for urbanization, thus an obstacle for specialization in occupation as each family was dependant on agriculture. One should always remember that Socrates was lucky enough to be born to a society where work was for slaves. As a free man Socrates was very much at leisure and had the time. So we'd have to debate about the potential of desired mental traits in populations.

  7. #7
    Keeps your Whites Whiter.
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SuuT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Germanic
    Subrace
    SkandoNordid/Nordicised Faelid
    Gender
    Politics
    Pan-Germanic MeritAristocracy
    Religion
    Heiðinn
    Posts
    1,467
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1
    Thanked in
    1 Post

    Re: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progressi

    Quote Originally Posted by SubGnostic View Post
    ...the Theory must not be for the sake of the masses.

    Agreed: science is generally baffling to the herd. To whom, though, are we directing our energies? Who is our target audience? If it be politically correct airheads (only) that will be dismissive about connecting the 'racial dots', then why do we not have every Ph.D in any and all applicable academic circles trying to pound-down this door?

    Is Science, are scientists, really so scared of the truth of the matter...?

    Not entirely. At some point the numbers can't lie.

    Right: In fact, they never do. Human beings are guided by more than quantification, though. As Decartes said, to paraphrase, a conviction cannot be unproven once one is convinced: it is as true as anything.

    So, the perception and subsequent interpretations of the quantifications can vary across-the-board.

    Are scientists blind? stupid? - are they liars?

    I'd suggest we hold to purely biological concepts and standpoints, at least for now. Stepping onto the cultural plane brings a great more deal of obscurity to the subject.

    There is a problem there, though. If Psychometrics correlate positively to phenotype, and personality type correlates accurately to psychometrics; then, it would follow that cultures and their respective achievements will correlate positively to phenotype - by only 2 degrees of logical separation.

    Maybe you are right about not discussing it now; however, at some point, culture must be discussed - as it, too, would be the result of a larger biological whole/system correlating to the appearance/phenotype of the progenitors of any given culture.

    ...

    One could argue that some Nordic populations lacked the environmental and social premises for higher culture. Scarce population being an obstacle for urbanization, thus an obstacle for specialization in occupation as each family was dependant on agriculture.

    Begs the question: then why is the Nordiform the most Hominised? Why do we not see everywhere in the history of history Nordiform individuals of Peak type living up to their psychometric stereotype?

    Why is the Nordiform special/worthy of a marked attention?

    One should always remember that Socrates was lucky enough to be born to a society where work was for slaves. As a free man Socrates was very much at leisure and had the time.

    Socrates was plebs, in origin. Nietzsche actually believed him to mark the retrogressive point in Greek development: it would seem that the Theory of Racial Progressiveness would support - indirectly - Nietzsche's assertion. Does the phenotype of Socrates match his psychometric profile...?

    Are we being complicated enough?

    Perhaps this, too, is important...

    So we'd have to debate about the potential of desired mental traits in populations.

    What populations have what potential?
    "...The moral man is a lower species than the immoral, a weaker species; indeed - he is a type in regard to morality, but not a type in himself; a copy...the measure of his value lies outside him. ... I assess the power of a will by how much resistance, pain, torture it endures and knows how to turn to its advantage; I do not account the evil and painful character of existence a reproach to it, but hope rather that it will one day be more evil and painful than hitherto..." (Nietzsche)

  8. #8
    Member SubGnostic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Online
    Monday, August 25th, 2008 @ 08:35 PM
    Location
    Kymenlaakso
    Gender
    Family
    Platonic love
    Religion
    Transhumanism
    Posts
    353
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Re: The Problem of ‘Progressive’: An Analysis Toward a Philosophy of Racial Progressi

    Agreed: science is generally baffling to the herd. To whom, though, are we directing our energies? Who is our target audience? If it be politically correct airheads (only) that will be dismissive about connecting the 'racial dots', then why do we not have every Ph.D in any and all applicable academic circles trying to pound-down this door?

    Is Science, are scientists, really so scared of the truth of the matter...?
    Scientists are people too. They're not devoid of the low instincts of man.
    They don't want to compromise their academic position, their credibility, and to become outcasts, after investing so much time and devotion into their fields of interest. Well, of course there are many social/cultural determinists who are just adhering to a certain (heavily Jewish-influenced) school of thought.

    Why is the Nordiform special/worthy of a marked attention?
    a) : The development of Homo clearly displays a direction towards further hominisation:



    I see no reason not to deem this a positive tendency and worthy of pursuing, as
    conscious evolution, so to say.

    b) : The supposed potential for certain mental qualities, that are of interest to us.

    We can't slip to the hidebound field of extreme determinism. Environment can affect intrinsic personality. Thus the use of the word potential. A persons course of life can leave his/her mental abilities scantly used. Like a flower becomes stunted or withers when kept in shade and left untended, but in favourable conditions, blooms.

    Socrates was plebs, in origin. Nietzsche actually believed him to mark the retrogressive point in Greek development: it would seem that the Theory of Racial Progressiveness would support - indirectly - Nietzsche's assertion. Does the phenotype of Socrates match his psychometric profile...?
    The unexpected results of Jerome Kagan's research of shyness, that expressed phenotype-mental character correlation, could imply that genetic material involved in the regulation of human morphogenesis, that account for phenotype, are inherited together with that which is responsible for cerebral development. Then again, these can be separately inherited, can't they?

    You can't draw demographics from a few individuals. A negroid college teacher and a nordoid trailer trash are hardly adequate representatives of their respective groups. Was/is intelligence, rather than how he spent his time, a prerequisite for the observations and ideas of Socrates?

    I don't know of psychometric profiles other than nordid and negroid.

    there are studies that make implications that research is needed into the implications of race as related to psychometrics
    The field of research in question would be differential psychology, founded by Sir Francis Galton, the "father of Eugenics". I'll see if I can find something on this. Agrippa has posted some figures of bodybuild-character correlation.



    1.) I finally got a copy of "Race (The Reality of Human Differences)" by Sarich and Miele. As they dispute the contemporary notions that race does not exist and that it is a mere social construct, they've put quite an emphasis also on genes:

    "...Certain alleles are more common in some races than in others, and sometimes, much more so. These have been called "ancestry informative markers" (AIMs). Just one or two or six AIMs are not enough to establish a person's race, that is, genetic ancestry. The more AIMs examined, the greater the probability of accurately determining the persons race...
    ...Repeatable, independent, academic research has established that with 100 genetic markers, it is possible to sort people whose known ancestors are from Africa, Europe, Asia, or the Americas with almost 100 percent accuracy. DNAPrint Genomics has reduced the number of AIMs required to seventy-three and extended the methoidology to determine the percentage of racial background in people of mixed ancestry...
    ...Frudakis [of DNAPrint Genomics] told ABC News in June 2003 that in 2000 blind tests (in which each person's self-reported race was unknown to technicians doing the DNA analysis), there was not a single error...
    ...If "race" were a mere social construction based upon a few highly visible features, it would have no statistical correlation with the DNA markers that indicate genetic relatedness...
    ...Unless race is a biological reality that gives important information about an individual's degree of genetic resemblance to the various human populations and the sequence in which those populations evolved by separating from other populations, it would be inconcievable to achieve the level of accuracy obtainable through the DNAPrint methodology. Indeed, given a sufficient number of markers, such analysis is capable of not only identifying race but predicting skin tone as well."

    Could this be applied also to subraces? It's basically the same thing, only the genetic variations are narrower.

    Siegfried posted this recently:
    "Distinct Genetic Profiles for Northern, Southern Europeans Found"

    http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/523543/?sc=dwhn


    P.S: Don't you love my new avatar?
    Last edited by SubGnostic; Wednesday, November 29th, 2006 at 11:43 PM.

  9. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Last Online
    Friday, March 30th, 2007 @ 05:34 PM
    Subrace
    UP+something good looking
    Country
    United States United States
    Location
    Tennessee
    Gender
    Family
    libertine bachelor
    Occupation
    Making dough
    Politics
    Capitalism
    Religion
    Athe-ism
    Posts
    17
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    0
    Thanked in
    0 Posts

    Racial progression?

    What exactly is racial progression? I've seen member commenting this type or that type is very progressive etc. Could someone please explain?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 25th, 2007 @ 11:29 AM
    Subrace
    nordiſch-weſtiſch
    Location
    Deutſchland
    Gender
    Family
    Single
    Politics
    Volk und Raſſe
    Posts
    1,621
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    6
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Man ſei Held oder Heiliger. In der Mitte liegt nicht die Weisheit, ſondern die Alltäglichkeit.

    SPENGLER

Similar Threads

  1. New Idea for Secret Society That Promotes European Racial Progression
    By feisty goddess in forum Strategic Intelligence
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: Monday, September 27th, 2010, 07:06 AM
  2. Amanda Tapping - racial analysis?
    By Curious American in forum Anthropological Taxonomy
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: Friday, September 15th, 2006, 11:03 PM
  3. Primitive vs Progressive Racial Features
    By Loki in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: Monday, February 21st, 2005, 09:00 PM
  4. Racial Analysis of the Sámi People
    By cosmocreator in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 53
    Last Post: Tuesday, July 15th, 2003, 02:08 AM
  5. Paradigm Shift in Racial Analysis
    By Von Braun in forum Physical Anthropology
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: Monday, March 31st, 2003, 10:26 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •