There are two men, one black, one white, which is the greater truth, that they are different races, or both men?

The most true is that they’re both men. Due to the mixture of races, there are few people who are “pure” as far as race. Its possible that the “black” man is more than a little white and the “white” man has at least a little black or something else.

there’s no difference in how true those two are.

they ARE different races, and they ARE both men.

I get that you’re trying to say that recognizing common humanity is more important than recognizing race… but that doesn’t mean that they don’t have different skin pigmentation

I honoustly believed that there is only one race, the human?

Both are important facts. Culture is attached to race, and we shouldn’t minimize that diversity is beautiful. I’ve had experiences that have effected me that someone who’s white hasn’t experienced and vice versa. There is common ground between all the world’s people, but I also think we should appreciate and love our differences.

I agree with @rebbel. I think race is misleading. It is only a surface difference.

@hug_of_war awesome answer, my thoughts exactly, much more eloquent though.

Interesting philosophy. How do you decide what is more or less true?

Not to mention, what does truth mean in this context?

There are no races. Race is a cultural artifact, that has been proven beyond any doubt to have no basis in science. The argument is over, it just takes time for lay people to catch up, especially those who have some sort of stake in ethnocentrism.

agreed with @pdworkin. There’s no biological proof that there are different races. It’s a socially constructed idea.

@daloon Think of it is as, the greater truth is that I am still alive, and the lesser truth is that I am still dying. Huh, or maybe two apples is a greater truth than one apple. Truth is what changes the least. That’s a tenet, greater truths change the least. Think of it in terms of procreation, a woman could sleep with either men, but she could not sleep with just one’s “whiteness” or “blackness”

First I see men then I see color. I am not colorblind, and I don’t think being colorblind is a positive thing. When I see a black man, I immediately know that this person has had a different experience than a white man.

@bumwithablackberry Try as I might (and I spent a good thirty seconds thinking about it), I can’t see any useful commonalities in those two examples. The first seems to be about how you prefer to think about something. The second seems to be about quantity of something. Or are you going for some kind of Platonic ideal?

Perhaps you are asking people to explain how they prefer to think about something—in terms of differences or in terms of commonalities?

Both Men

Firstly, they are both men.

Uh, yes they do, and your right they are both men. A lot of people don’t get this. Thanks for your answers. Some people think I’m being racist, but the result being, I’m suggesting that being human is a greater truth than what race we are so and that I kind of regret sleeping with both of them, because they never called me back, kidding kidding.

Here this is an example of me being racist:
“I’m sick of hearing that race is only a matter of skin color, like as if me getting a tan would make me a better dancer” that’s about as racist as I get.

They are more similar then they are different. I mean, come on, they’re the same species!

The greater truth is that they are both men.

@Rebbel No. Human is the species. Homo sapiens sapiens.
Every domesticated dog is still Canis lupus familiaris, whether they’re chihuahuas or great danes.

Those who think race is a social construct? Go find an albino African person and tell me that he/she has the same facial characteristics as your average White person (you have my permission to google).

Biologically at least, the order would be:

1) they are both material beings
2) they are both living organisms
3) they are both animals
4) they are both humans
5) they are of different human races
6) they are of different family, nationality, social background etc

There are also other sub-categories (onion layers inbetween). I’d say age is probably more important than race, even though most people don’t see it that way. I have a lot more in common with my friend Johnny than with his kids, but I also have a lot more in common with him than with some white guy’s kids. And I probably have more in common with him than a white woman my age, or even my sister.

Science tells us that skin color is no more significant genetically than any other human trait, like eye color or weight. That we use skin color to categorize humanity is arbitrary. For all of it’s genetic value we could just as easily define race by height and it would be no more or less reasonable than defining it by skin color.

The distinction we put on skin color is social.

@fundevogel It’s not just skin color that defines someone’s race (though skin color is the main factor). There’s also the shape of the face and hair color.

@doggywuv All of those distinctions, alone, in tandem, or together are precisely meaningless. There is no such thing as race. Sorry pal, get used to it.

Both men. And more than that, both people. Both human beings.

Both statements are equally true, but I think it is more important that they are both people.

Could it possibly be that the skin color doesn’t matter. It is that persons background that defines them. People think that since someone is a different color that they are better than that person but how do you know. It could be a white person that lives off welfare. He may see a black man that makes a 6-digit salary and think that he is better than the black man. Maybe it is the culture that we see and we stick that with a skin tone. I know a white person that speaks Ebonics. That doesn’t mean he is a different race. It is just the culture he grew up with that defined him.

sorry for the rambling

What the hell is a “greater truth”?

@erniefernandez exactly my response haha

well if they are wearing pants i can’t see their penises. but if their legs, arms, or faces are showing, then i can see their skin color.
(am i supposed to take your word for it that they are men? have you seen their junk?)

and where’s the brown guy!? i guess people forget that the majority of the food they eat has gone through the hands of a shade of brown.

What is your definition of “man”? Male or human?

@erniefernandez: It’s explained in the thread if you read it before answering.

To those who say race doesn’t exist: Does gender/sex exist? Do different hair/eye colors exist? Do hereditary diseases exist? If these do exist, why does race not exist?

@barumonkey That’s like saying if apples exist, why don’t unicorns exist. I have said this many times but I will try once more:

There is plenty of variation among humans. Hair, eyes, hereditary diseases, are all variations. However, there is no metric by which to classify people into races. You can classify them into people with blue eyes and people without, people with blond hair and people without, but there is no set of attributes that defines a race. None. No such thing.

There is more genetic variation among people with black skin than there is between two groups of people, one with black skin and one with white skin. The skin color only reflects one thing – a clinal variation in melanin production depending upon how much or how little Vitamin D the ancestors were getting in their original place of dwelling. That’s it. That’s not a racial difference, it is a very superficial inconsequential difference from which no inference can be drawn about intelligence, basketball skills, or a propensity to enjoy watermelon.

Time to accept the facts and move on. There is nothing superior about you because of your skin or your eye color. Nothing inferior, either. It just doesn’t matter worth a fuck. Got it?

@pdworkin: Please do not take this issue personally, or get angry about it. Obscenity is not necessary. Please note that at no point did anyone here suggest that one’s race is a predictor of any other non-race-related attribute of that person (e.g., basketball skills), or that any one race is “better” than any other. Please don’t put words into our mouths.

The question at hand is whether or not race exists. I believe it does:
“The term race or racial group usually refers to the categorization of humans into populations or groups on the basis of various sets of heritable characteristics.[1] The most widely used human racial categories are based on salient visual traits (especially skin color, cranial or facial features and hair texture), and self-identification.”
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_%28classification_of_human_beings%29)

Even though “race definitions are imprecise, arbitrary, derived from custom, have many exceptions, have many gradations, and… the numbers of races delineated vary according to the culture making the racial distinctions”, it is still used as a classification tool worldwide. I infer, therefore, that it exists, albeit differently in different areas, just like arbitrarily-constructed languages exist with varying dialects.

@barumonkey. I speak as I choose, thank you, and your definition of race is a form of fallacy called petitio principii. You could look it up.

@pdworkin: I’ve looked it up, thank you. I’m less sure that I’m using that fallacy, but maybe you’re right. Perhaps we’re disagreeing on what “exist” means. I am stating that the classification of “race” exists because I can observe people using it to classify people into categories (e.g., on official forms, affirmative action policies, self-identification, etc.), using metrics that may at times vary. I think you might be saying that race cannot be well-defined, or perhaps that it should not be defined at all. Is this correct?

I see now that the examples in my previous comment weren’t as accurate as I was aiming for. I will rephrase “do hereditary diseases exist” to “does the word ‘blog’ exist” (an arbitrary social construct that cannot be easily defined and is not used by everyone).

By the way, if we’re pointing out logical fallacies, then the first paragraph of my previous statement is saying that you used the “straw man” fallacy.

Race certainly exists as a social construct, and even his some utility, in terms of the dispensation of social services, etc. But that is merely situational, and left over from a time when science believed there were “races” of humans. We now know that there are not.

It is devoutly to be wished that the cultural distinctions will some day wither away. One way to begin that process is to be very, very careful about using the word “race”. Personally I find it far more offensive than the word “fuck”.

Uh, crap. This wasn’t supposed to be a discussion of race, but of truth. Some things are more true, or more constant. That’s all, though this was interesting, this conversation has taken an ignorant, inflamatory tone, and I find it greatly disheartening, I’m going to go cancel my account now, and come back as a white man, or maybe an asian, no difference right. Or I’ll just kick it magenta like and thank y’all for the fantastic discussion, but why nobody thought this was a “great question” come on, yeesh. Much love for all my humans and aliens.
Oh and the answer is their both men. But it’s philosophical so it’s open to interpretation, I guess

@bumwithablackberry “the answer is ______”

why did you ask a question if you already “knew” the answer.

i put knew in quotes because obviously many people disagree with you.

most people who are not white see themselves as existing within a racial category, (i.e. BLACK + MAN = Black Man, MEXICAN + WOMAN = Mexican Women, and etc). So why do you get to tell them who they are. “just men,” with no race.

I’d probably think that there are 2 of them before anything else. I guess I see truth in numbers then?

First they are human beings, then men, then race.

@alive this is a significant point you make. That minorities might see themselves, or are more likely to use a racial category first when white people don’t. I find a lot of white people, who live in very white areas, are more likely to be less aware of race, cultural differences, and even offended by discussions of race and cultural differences. I think this even affects things like presidential elections.

@bumwithablackberry your question has race in it.

I don’t know, are they making out?
on a serious note, I would notice both things simultaneously
in that I would perceive them in the way our society constructs what a man should look like and that their skin color is different

both race and gender are social constructs placed on certain biological markers

Why but my question kicks ass

@bumwithablackberry say again?

@bumwithablackberry nobody gave you a “Good Question” because we have all heard this question a million times. usually by the time we are in 2nd grade.

Uh, it’s not a race question, it’s a logic question. Should have used a different subjects so all the idiots could look past it.

Yep, we’re the idiots. We just weren’t clever enough to keep up with your sophistication. Boy, is my face red.

if it is a “logic” question i would refer you to the second answer under your question. @ABoyNamedBoobs03‘s answer, “there’s no difference in how true those two are. they ARE different races, and they ARE both men.”

How can you have one FACT that is “more true” than another FACT, if they are in fact both FACTS?

Maybe you should re-think your logic… here’s a start Crime Against Logic

I don’t know do you feel like an idiot, I don’t.
It’s possible to have degree’s to things. That’s why we have varying degree’s of punishments for crimes. Like someone could be a man, but someone can’t just be a part of what makes him that specific person.

Some things are measurable in degrees (height, temperature, pleasure, wealth, intelligence). Some are not (truth, uniqueness, perfection). The very meaning of the word disallows shades of gray.

If I were to say we are both young it could be true, but since I may be younger, it’s truer for me.

Nope. One is relative, and the other is absolute.

I’m not quite orange am I?

No. But don’t worry, you don’t want to be orange. It doesn’t rhyme with anything.

Orange is for Cak, I just switched back because it seems she is on the mend. I still check updates on her thread all of the time.