But, you know, there is a certain irreducible complexity to the unpredictably inane things that seem to emanate from the mysterious "krellin" entity.

so maybe it is real. i have to say i'm fairly agnostic about it at this point. any true believers out there care to convince me?

I may have to add a #krellinisntreal tab to tweetdeck. It can be a secret handshake kind of thing.

Agnosticism cannot be a philosophical position that provides any vision for how to live your life.

#AgnosticKrellinismIsAFailedPrinciple

If you can identify an African person by inspecting their hair follicles under a microscope, and identify human remains as being Native American by their shovel shaped incisors, then clearly the idea of "race" is more than just a social construct. Is it really such an Earth shattering revelation to acknowledge that Asians, Africans, and Caucasians have physical (and possibly cognitive) differences? Variety is beautiful, and one of the many wonders of life. Embrace it.

CountDArnise, you're confusing heritage and race. What is an "African person?" What does it mean for "human remains [to be] Native American?" As I said before, phenotypic expressions are the basis for a classification of race, yet I have a coworker, one-eighth Japanese heritage and seven-eighths African heritage, who appears "black" except in her hair. This is an instance where your example fails. Just looking at her hair, she would be considered Japanese.

My undergraduate degree was in history/anthropology, so I'm familiar with the race, ethnicity, heritage shell-game. Personally, I would choose to call your friend multi-racial. She is free to call herself whatever she is most comfortable with.

Still waiting Thucy...

Lol waiting for what redhouse? For krellin to come back?

There is no krellin. Give up on your superstitious fantasies.

I am waiting for you to respond to my point that Affirmative Action seems to have the downside that those people, who even in absence of the AA system would have gotten into a University / company board / etc., may be discriminated against because people suspect that they only acquired their fortunate position due to the AA system and not on their own merits.

I pointed out the example of putting a minimum of women in corporate boards in Europe, which I believe will gravely damage those women who would have gotten on the board even in absence of such a measure, but because of their own strength.

I find that an important issue and I would like to ask you to address it.

Oh, bro this is a thread about the existence of the concept of "krellin" but I'll respond quickly:

It is the fault of the people who discriminate against them for discriminating, not of the people themselves or of the AA system. The people who discriminate against those people, if they do so, should be discouraged from doing so through official means if necessary. In America we have laws about equal opportunity employment.

Furthermore I have never heard of any minority students on my campus being discriminated against because people thought they got here on affirmative action. We treat them like any other student. In fact, in my experience, once you're in university, nobody cares how you got there, what was your high school class rank, etc. They care that you *are* there, and whether you are academically holding your own.

And since they do, because, remember, there is no difference in intelligence between the races, it ends up not mattering.

So you plea for a program that supposedly helps cure discrimination, and then once the minorities' students get in by that program, giving others a better (read: less bad) ground for discrimination than simply the color of their skin, that discrimination sort of magically disappears? I don't buy it. In fact, I've been in University myself and we have a similar program as AA in Holland (although having nothing to do with minorities) and I can tell you, these students are discriminated against behind their backs.

@ Thucy. ''I do not believe humans will ever speciate along current racial lines.''

The real question is, relying exclusively on the hypothesis of Natural Selection, do you deny that speciation in the future is highly likely*? *Nothing is certain in science, I am not sure about social science.
If you do, then I am afraid that I would describe you as anthropocentric (regarding man as the most important and central factor in the universe).

How is Thucy making any commentary whatsoever about the relative 'importance' of human beings, and why do you constantly make hay about 'anthropocentrism' anyway? Speciation occurs in fixed, small, isolated populations because with widespread interbreeding new traits cannot be fixed upon the new generations. Human beings, thanks to imperialism and globalization, aren't fixed, small & isolated anywhere, and we have racial intermingling everywhere. This is not a commentary about human beings being 'important', it's a commentary about the conditions facing human beings being different.

I know this point has been made to Fulham countless times, but for whatever reason he chooses to ignore it and continue to lob this 'anthropocentrism' charge all the time. I fail to see why a creationist or anti-Darwinian would be against anthropocentrism, even if it were true, and I doubt he'll explain - because he never bothers to explain anything.

"there is no difference in intelligence between the races"

There is, actually, a difference but the cause of the difference is overdetermined since we cannot control for racism.

wat is intelligence

The speed of processing information and capacity for storing it.

I feel like this article may be of some interest to those still reading this thread:

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/07/opinion/sunday/intelligence-and-the-stereotype-threat.html?adxnnl=1&adxnnlx=1349755465-M4c9TfIN5kRKPVg1xMGmGA

The opening paragraphs of this article are so fallacious I can hardly keep going.

I will though.

It turned out to be interesting after all! Thanks for sharing.

If true, shouldn't people with social anxiety disorders all have abysmally low IQs?

Not necessarily. It seemed as though for the most part, they had to be anxious _about their intelligence_ to do worse -- no?

Yeah, the /performance/ changed due to anxiety (over stereotypes), not actual intelligence changing. I think the implications of such a study are interesting when considered with everything else in this thread (including #KrellinIsNotReal).

Texas better than all

Speciation in the future is probably going to occur yes. Not anytime soon, but it would be madness to assume humans will go on in a more or less biologically unaltered state forever.

Race, however, will absolutely not be the underpinning of the speciation. It will be something else, like planetary location, wealth, or otherwise.