Countries that believe their culture is superior to others

[[email protected]]

I agree,

Culture is indeed at least partly tied to genetics. Even if certain components of one culture influences another, the group adopting it puts their own unique imprint on it, according to their own sensibilities. Culture, like genetics can mutate according to location. Moreover, that "mutation" of culture, probably has a correlation with the genetics of the people.

I'm just a little uncomfortable with that! Maybe I'm missing something, but the people of England didn't know what their genetic makeup was. They made the decisions they made over the generations based on historical events, not their underlying DNA. Those events and how they responded to them created the modern liberal democratic order and it didn't matter whether they were R1b, I2, or G2a.

Now I get that if a butterfly dies the course of history changes (reference a classic SciFi short story), but this is giving too much weight to an underlying factor with no discernable effect on external events.

Both of you guys are real smart, so tell me where I've gone astray. I just think that a child born in an East Asian haplogroup, if raised in Shropshire since that birth, would end up being a Shropshire lad, or lass. I think culture rules.

[Yetos]

I'm just a little uncomfortable with that! Maybe I'm missing something, but the people of England didn't know what their genetic makeup was. They made the decisions they made over the generations based on historical events, not their underlying DNA. Those events and how they responded to them created the modern liberal democratic order and it didn't matter whether they were R1b, I2, or G2a.

Now I get that if a butterfly dies the course of history changes (reference a classic SciFi short story), but this is giving too much weight to an underlying factor with no discernable effect on external events.

Both of you guys are real smart, so tell me where I've gone astray. I just think that a child born in an East Asian haplogroup, if raised in Shropshire since that birth, would end up being a Shropshire lad, or lass. I think culture rules.

That was Plato statement milleniums ago

[Angela]

I agree,

Culture is indeed at least partly tied to genetics. Even if certain components of one culture influences another, the group adopting it puts their own unique imprint on it, according to their own sensibilities. Culture, like genetics can mutate according to location. Moreover, that "mutation" of culture, probably has a correlation with the genetics of the people.

I think that's really true.

I also think that if people migrating into a culture who come from a very different background, with very different genetics, and become the majority, the original culture changes.

[Ailchu]

That was Plato statement milleniums ago

so you actually connect genetics with ethnocentrism. then why exactly did you ask me what you should do with turkey?

and say, what did you mean with using the UN and diplomacy instead of inner war and extermination?

plus, what was your point about switzerland and that greek guy?

[Yetos]

hmm, so you actually connect genetics with ethnocentrism. then why exactly did you ask me what you should do with turkey?

and say, what did you mean with using the UN and diplomacy instead of inner war and extermination?

plus, what was your point about switzerland and that greek guy?

after this bellow, your logical extract is the above quote?

I'm just a little uncomfortable with that! Maybe I'm missing something, but the people of England didn't know what their genetic makeup was. They made the decisions they made over the generations based on historical events, not their underlying DNA. Those events and how they responded to them created the modern liberal democratic order and it didn't matter whether they were R1b, I2, or G2a.

Now I get that if a butterfly dies the course of history changes (reference a classic SciFi short story), but this is giving too much weight to an underlying factor with no discernable effect on external events.

Both of you guys are real smart, so tell me where I've gone astray. I just think that a child born in an East Asian haplogroup, if raised in Shropshire since that birth, would end up being a Shropshire lad, or lass. I think culture rules.

That was Plato statement milleniums ago

[Ailchu]

after this bellow, your logical extract is the above quote?

my mistake sry. i just knew that some greek philosophers had a different opinion here, should have checked first. i was still a bit confused because you argued with me before for some reason. and becasue of sentences like these "the difference of genetics is obvious, and will never be overpassed as also the behavour of the kids among them." seems like we had a similar opinion the whole time. but can you still say what you tried to say?

[Angela]

I'm just a little uncomfortable with that! Maybe I'm missing something, but the people of England didn't know what their genetic makeup was. They made the decisions they made over the generations based on historical events, not their underlying DNA. Those events and how they responded to them created the modern liberal democratic order and it didn't matter whether they were R1b, I2, or G2a.

Now I get that if a butterfly dies the course of history changes (reference a classic SciFi short story), but this is giving too much weight to an underlying factor with no discernable effect on external events.

Both of you guys are real smart, so tell me where I've gone astray. I just think that a child born in an East Asian haplogroup, if raised in Shropshire since that birth, would end up being a Shropshire lad, or lass. I think culture rules.

I'm butting in, but I completely disagree. Culture doesn't COMPLETELY rule anything, just as environment doesn't completely, or, imo majorly rule anything when it comes to individuals. If you believe what you say you believe, I wouldn't be able to convince you so I won't try. It would require an entire thread of its own.

[Ailchu]

Imo, culture stems from genetics, at least in part, and at least initially. I don't see how you can completely separate it.

No matter how many people have come to partake of the American "experience" and be indoctrinated in its values, the "system", the culture, is still basically British, as it is in Australia, and New Zealand and Canada, and it was practiced by people carrying those genetics for hundreds of years. That's why it lasted. In other places ruled by Britain where the British were a tiny minority, the systems didn't last.

so if american ethnocentrists would want to keep american culture american they would have to somehow keep non-british descent people down?
that culture stems from genetics only initially would actually mean that culture does not stem from genetics or that the correlation is not a causality. so you could seperate it.

I think that's really true.

I also think that if people migrating into a culture who come from a very different background, with very different genetics, and become the majority, the original culture changes.

do you have examples? let's say that original culture is italian, then what are the "very different genetics" that could change the culture? how do you define who is genetically able to be culturally italian?

and do you think it is justified that turks in germany are not considered as complete germans?

[Yetos]

so if amercan ethnocentrists would want to keep american culture american they would have to somehow keep non-british descent people down?



do you have examples? let's say that original culture is italian, then what are the "very different genetics" that could change the culture? how do you define who is genetically able to be culturally italian?

and do you think it is justified that turks in germany are not considered as complete germans?

are you asking people who are not in Germany, who are not Germans or Turks, etc etc this question?

[[email protected]]

I'm butting in, but I completely disagree. Culture doesn't COMPLETELY rule anything, just as environment doesn't completely, or, imo majorly rule anything when it comes to individuals. If you believe what you say you believe, I wouldn't be able to convince you so I won't try. It would require an entire thread of its own.

Jeez, you having a bad day or something?

[Angela]

Jeez, you having a bad day or something?

I'm sorry if that came across as curt or aggressive or something. I didn't mean it to be. I like your posts and point of view; we just disagree in this particular instance.

I just see a much bigger role for genetics in both individuals and cultures, and a discussion of how much genetics impacts individuals in many more ways than just physical ones is very complicated and would require a thread of its own with lots of papers to link etc.

That's all I meant. I wouldn't be able to persuade you within the strictures of this thread, which has indeed turned ugly.

[Jovialis]

I think this thread is causing people more grief, than rigorous debate. It has indeed become ugly. Therefore, I think it is better for our community, if I close it down, at least for now.

[Angela]

I think that's a great idea, Jovialis.