Pants-of-dog wrote:This is vague.
As it has to be.
You see, I fully assent to the idea that there is not a
hard break between any groups of humans that we can absolutely point to as a singular distinction between the two. Yet, they are clearly distinct because we can very reliably distinguish between people whose grandparents were black Africans and people whose grandparents were all from China.
So, it is a difference, but in some places it can become foggy.
None of this is an argument. It is merely your opinion about my debating style.
I do not think of each point as an individual argument, but as an individual topic.
This is not your original position.
Your original position was that the differenxes between the races are so distinct and clear, and some races are clearly more advantageous to have around and that this is a rational reason for racism.
If you are now conceding that original argument and now are advocating this very different argument, okay.
You do not understand what is meant: I am here to point out that our genetic predispositions affect who we are, and that this comes from our heritage; whatever we call the lines of transmission of our genetics is irrelevant.
It is obvious and true that genetics has an effect on us.
No one ever disputed this.
And, as it is true that some people are born to be tall, some people are born with sets of genes that can make them superior athletes, correct?
Our characteristics are often have a basis in our genetics, correct?