There is no such things as natural distrust for people with different skin colors in humans.
No, this is literally a fact. A majority of european were black up until 8000 years ago
https://www.science.org/content/article/how-europeans-evolved-white-skin
As shown here hunter gatherer in the far noth were already pale, but others were dark skin. Chances are that the environment put more pressure on those people.
The point being that the color of skin is not genetically registered as a danger for evolution, which is logical since our ancestor were all dark skin to begin with. Which is another reason why racism is not inscribed in our biology but is a complete social construct.
There is no such thing as common sense when we ask questions in science.
I had a doubt about the discriminations in animals, due to me not remembering the fact that some animals do indeed discriminate others based on their disabilities (or potential danger for reproduction or cohesion of the group), so I asked you the sources and I checked myself later. Simple as that.
And this lead me to understand that Humans do not discriminate other humans in the same way, which is interesting. We are really a social specie.
Understand that when I'm asking sources, I'm never in the mindset of proving the other wrong, I'm in a state of doubt and in the mindset of learning something potentially new.
Justified, yes. But that rarely the real reason, wars are usually a question of power and ressources. Even Hitler didn't wage war based on his ideology.
Indeed. But the real reason was a question of domination. But those behavior are socially constructed. Wars, despite what pessimistic people will have you think, are not a consequence of our human nature, they are the consequences of the systems we live in.
In a good system were people have enough ressources to live and were there are no reasons for discrimination, there shall be no wars.
"tribal instinct" can mean a lot of things, you will have to precise that. Because as it is, I don't think that there is any proof of anything remotely comparable in our genetic.
You might wanna be talking about cognitive biases for example, that are most likely due to evolution and our need for survival. But as a social specie, we learned to override those, and therefore the tribe instinct doesn't really hold a candle. Some early humans were probably as pacifist toward others as some people on this planet right now.
You just made me learn a new word, thanks.
Indeed. i'm not talking about biologist, but rather anthropologist here. Biologist don't really have a lot to say about human behaviors and usually, when some are trying to bridge the gap, it's not really pretty. See what I mean by that HERE.
Some people think that human have a fundamental nature and that this fundamental nature is egotistical. Hence the sayin "man is a wolf to man".. this is deeply flawed, we do have a form of natural egoism, but it's balanced by a evoltionnary altruism as well.. In result, we are not an homogenous specie, and our behavior will vary in function of a lot of parameters such as the social system, the climate, the cultural habbits, the beliefs etc.
Sadly, the beliefs that man is a wolf to man is hegemonic and has been one of the fundations for the system that we know today as Capitalism.
Meaning that as long as we will believe in that sayin, we will not manage to create a new path and a new system.
Of course, who doesn't ?
No, this is literally a fact. A majority of european were black up until 8000 years ago
https://www.science.org/content/article/how-europeans-evolved-white-skin
As shown here hunter gatherer in the far noth were already pale, but others were dark skin. Chances are that the environment put more pressure on those people.
The point being that the color of skin is not genetically registered as a danger for evolution, which is logical since our ancestor were all dark skin to begin with. Which is another reason why racism is not inscribed in our biology but is a complete social construct.
There is no such thing as common sense when we ask questions in science.
I had a doubt about the discriminations in animals, due to me not remembering the fact that some animals do indeed discriminate others based on their disabilities (or potential danger for reproduction or cohesion of the group), so I asked you the sources and I checked myself later. Simple as that.
And this lead me to understand that Humans do not discriminate other humans in the same way, which is interesting. We are really a social specie.
Understand that when I'm asking sources, I'm never in the mindset of proving the other wrong, I'm in a state of doubt and in the mindset of learning something potentially new.
Justified, yes. But that rarely the real reason, wars are usually a question of power and ressources. Even Hitler didn't wage war based on his ideology.
Indeed. But the real reason was a question of domination. But those behavior are socially constructed. Wars, despite what pessimistic people will have you think, are not a consequence of our human nature, they are the consequences of the systems we live in.
In a good system were people have enough ressources to live and were there are no reasons for discrimination, there shall be no wars.
"tribal instinct" can mean a lot of things, you will have to precise that. Because as it is, I don't think that there is any proof of anything remotely comparable in our genetic.
You might wanna be talking about cognitive biases for example, that are most likely due to evolution and our need for survival. But as a social specie, we learned to override those, and therefore the tribe instinct doesn't really hold a candle. Some early humans were probably as pacifist toward others as some people on this planet right now.
You just made me learn a new word, thanks.
Indeed. i'm not talking about biologist, but rather anthropologist here. Biologist don't really have a lot to say about human behaviors and usually, when some are trying to bridge the gap, it's not really pretty. See what I mean by that HERE.
Some people think that human have a fundamental nature and that this fundamental nature is egotistical. Hence the sayin "man is a wolf to man".. this is deeply flawed, we do have a form of natural egoism, but it's balanced by a evoltionnary altruism as well.. In result, we are not an homogenous specie, and our behavior will vary in function of a lot of parameters such as the social system, the climate, the cultural habbits, the beliefs etc.
Sadly, the beliefs that man is a wolf to man is hegemonic and has been one of the fundations for the system that we know today as Capitalism.
Meaning that as long as we will believe in that sayin, we will not manage to create a new path and a new system.
Of course, who doesn't ?
Last edited:
