Total Posts:18|Showing Posts:1-18
Jump to topic:

Do Haplogroups actually exist?

Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...
whiteflame
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:02:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

I don't. There's a common thread that unites everyone in a haplogroup, and therefore a haplogroup must exist, at least insofar as I'm aware. For example, In molecular evolution, it signifies a group of similar haplotypes that share a common ancestor having the same single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) mutation in all haplotypes. Sharing that SNP is what groups them. Now, one could argue that all groups are social constructs, and they are, but that's because we select traits that we care about and use them to group various peoples/animals/items/etc. That doesn't mean that those traits don't function as an objective means of grouping some things, it just means that the onus we put on that grouping is subjective.

I hope that makes sense.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:04:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:02:09 PM, whiteflame wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

I don't. There's a common thread that unites everyone in a haplogroup, and therefore a haplogroup must exist, at least insofar as I'm aware. For example, In molecular evolution, it signifies a group of similar haplotypes that share a common ancestor having the same single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) mutation in all haplotypes. Sharing that SNP is what groups them. Now, one could argue that all groups are social constructs, and they are, but that's because we select traits that we care about and use them to group various peoples/animals/items/etc. That doesn't mean that those traits don't function as an objective means of grouping some things, it just means that the onus we put on that grouping is subjective.

I hope that makes sense.

It does, thanks.

So would you conclude that I stand a good chance of winning this debate on a similar subject? http://www.debate.org...
whiteflame
Posts: 1,378
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:07:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:04:31 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:02:09 PM, whiteflame wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

I don't. There's a common thread that unites everyone in a haplogroup, and therefore a haplogroup must exist, at least insofar as I'm aware. For example, In molecular evolution, it signifies a group of similar haplotypes that share a common ancestor having the same single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) mutation in all haplotypes. Sharing that SNP is what groups them. Now, one could argue that all groups are social constructs, and they are, but that's because we select traits that we care about and use them to group various peoples/animals/items/etc. That doesn't mean that those traits don't function as an objective means of grouping some things, it just means that the onus we put on that grouping is subjective.

I hope that makes sense.

It does, thanks.

So would you conclude that I stand a good chance of winning this debate on a similar subject? http://www.debate.org...

Oh yeah, I do.
taurl95
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:08:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

He didn't say that "haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist" so you literally just lied and put words in his mouth. He said, race, as it is categorized by human beings, is a flawed social construct. This is a clear case of straw man fallacy.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:11:03 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:08:25 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

He didn't say that "haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist" so you literally just lied and put words in his mouth. He said, race, as it is categorized by human beings, is a flawed social construct. This is a clear case of straw man fallacy.

I explained that the term is used synonymously by many anthropologists.
taurl95
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:13:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:11:03 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:08:25 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

He didn't say that "haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist" so you literally just lied and put words in his mouth. He said, race, as it is categorized by human beings, is a flawed social construct. This is a clear case of straw man fallacy.

I explained that the term is used synonymously by many anthropologists.

But it's not about the anthropologist view, as Briantheliberal pointed out, it's about society's view. I am not really an expert on race, but you still put words in his mouth and that is still wrong.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:16:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:13:16 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:11:03 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:08:25 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

He didn't say that "haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist" so you literally just lied and put words in his mouth. He said, race, as it is categorized by human beings, is a flawed social construct. This is a clear case of straw man fallacy.

I explained that the term is used synonymously by many anthropologists.

But it's not about the anthropologist view, as Briantheliberal pointed out, it's about society's view. I am not really an expert on race, but you still put words in his mouth and that is still wrong.

It is fine. He strawmans republicans all the time. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.
SamStevens
Posts: 3,819
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:18:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

Even though race is a controversial topic, populations of people may display certain features that are different from others. Race is not purely a social construct.

Human male Asian skull: http://www.boneclones.com...

Human male Australian Aboriginal skull: http://www.boneclones.com...

Human male African skull: http://www.boneclones.com...
http://www.boneclones.com...

Human male European skull: http://www.boneclones.com...
http://www.boneclones.com...
http://www.boneclones.com...

Human Male Polynesian Skull: http://www.boneclones.com...

Comparative sets:

http://www.boneclones.com...
"This is the true horror of religion. It allows perfectly decent and sane people to believe by the billions, what only lunatics could believe on their own." Sam Harris
Life asked Death "Why do people love me but hate you?"
Death responded: "Because you are a beautiful lie, and I am the painful truth."
taurl95
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:20:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:16:04 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:13:16 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:11:03 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:08:25 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

He didn't say that "haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist" so you literally just lied and put words in his mouth. He said, race, as it is categorized by human beings, is a flawed social construct. This is a clear case of straw man fallacy.

I explained that the term is used synonymously by many anthropologists.

But it's not about the anthropologist view, as Briantheliberal pointed out, it's about society's view. I am not really an expert on race, but you still put words in his mouth and that is still wrong.

It is fine. He strawmans republicans all the time. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

It doesn't matter. Just because he does it, doesn't somehow justify you doing it to him. As far as I know, I am pretty new and have only been looking around before actually deciding to join, and honestly, I may not agree with everything he says, but there is a lot of truth to his views. I haven't really seen him straw-man anyone though.
Wylted
Posts: 21,167
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:21:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:20:16 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:16:04 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:13:16 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:11:03 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:08:25 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

He didn't say that "haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist" so you literally just lied and put words in his mouth. He said, race, as it is categorized by human beings, is a flawed social construct. This is a clear case of straw man fallacy.

I explained that the term is used synonymously by many anthropologists.

But it's not about the anthropologist view, as Briantheliberal pointed out, it's about society's view. I am not really an expert on race, but you still put words in his mouth and that is still wrong.

It is fine. He strawmans republicans all the time. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

It doesn't matter. Just because he does it, doesn't somehow justify you doing it to him. As far as I know, I am pretty new and have only been looking around before actually deciding to join, and honestly, I may not agree with everything he says, but there is a lot of truth to his views. I haven't really seen him straw-man anyone though.

Welcome to DDO
taurl95
Posts: 4
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:26:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:21:52 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:20:16 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:16:04 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:13:16 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:11:03 PM, Wylted wrote:
At 3/13/2015 9:08:25 PM, taurl95 wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

He didn't say that "haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist" so you literally just lied and put words in his mouth. He said, race, as it is categorized by human beings, is a flawed social construct. This is a clear case of straw man fallacy.

I explained that the term is used synonymously by many anthropologists.

But it's not about the anthropologist view, as Briantheliberal pointed out, it's about society's view. I am not really an expert on race, but you still put words in his mouth and that is still wrong.

It is fine. He strawmans republicans all the time. What is good for the goose is good for the gander.

It doesn't matter. Just because he does it, doesn't somehow justify you doing it to him. As far as I know, I am pretty new and have only been looking around before actually deciding to join, and honestly, I may not agree with everything he says, but there is a lot of truth to his views. I haven't really seen him straw-man anyone though.

Welcome to DDO

Thanks.
Envisage
Posts: 3,646
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/13/2015 9:26:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

Race =/= halpogroups.

I am actually with brian on the face that races are arbitary, and thus the question of "existance" is pretty meaningless. The definition of a race is indeed arbitary, but so is he definition of species, family, genus, etc.
RuvDraba
Posts: 6,033
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2015 10:04:19 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:26:42 PM, Envisage wrote:
Race =/= halpogroups.

I am actually with brian on the face that races are arbitary, and thus the question of "existance" is pretty meaningless. The definition of a race is indeed arbitary, but so is he definition of species, family, genus, etc.

I agree. Informatically, taxa are categories used to help organise information for curation and analysis. Their construction is based on the way information is expected to be used.

Before there was extensive genetic and microcellular analysis, taxonomies of species used to be by appearance, function or both. As more was understood about cellular structures, genetics and evolution, whole taxa disappeared (for example, nobody now talks about protozoans), or were consolidated, divided or created.

These changes aren't haphazard; they're clinical, informatic and pragmatic.

The way people once used 'race' was as much about culture as appearance: not just physical descent, but cultural traits thought to be innate to each group. Then as the significance of education was realised, it became a lot more about appearance with some implication of where it originated, but now genetics may mean we need to rethink the way we categorise people.

But meanwhile, the common usage varies from place to place. In the US for example, I note my American friends speaking of 'white', 'black', 'red', 'yellow' and 'brown' people -- each referring to a particular place and history of origin.

In Australia, we can't use that. Our region of Oceania has a huge spectrum of white, brown and yellow, and people with skins dark enough to be called black could easily come from any of four continents -- or one of several pacific island groups.

I can't personally see much use for the word 'race' in modern multicultural conversation. In Australia, if I can't tell Maori from Samoan, Maltese from Lebanese, Chinese from Korean, Aborigine from Torres Strait Islander, Laotian from Vietnamese, Sikh from Pakistani, or Afghan from Iranian, I'm socially disadvantaged in certain situations.

And like telling English from Irish, all that differentiation takes a lot more than skin. :)
Mhykiel
Posts: 5,987
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/14/2015 10:22:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

I agree Race is a social construct.

As for Haplogroup, it is a way of categorizing things. Do categories exist in reality? I would argue categorizing things by a common feature is and in of itself a human construct. A way to break things down for us to digest.

This use of haplogroups to people can be used in a variety of ways and makes race just one subjective measure of a common attribute.

I've said this before, if skin color were as easily changed by buying a bottle of dye at CVS, race would be no more important than the color of ones nails or hair.

I dislike the term race and it's use by people. It should be put in it's place. Does anyone expect a war to break out between redheads and brunettes? (redheads would win of course)
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2015 2:05:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
There's difference between a race and a haplogroup. A haplogroup is a group of DNA variations inherited together that share the SNP mutation in all of them. A "race" is an informal taxonomic ranking that bases on certain biological differences within the same species. Despite major differences in features, I tend to agree that races are arbitrary; they "exist," in a sense, but I don't think they should be expanded as a formal taxonomic rank.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
tejretics
Posts: 6,089
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/27/2015 2:25:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 9:18:46 PM, SamStevens wrote:
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

Even though race is a controversial topic, populations of people may display certain features that are different from others. Race is not purely a social construct.

Human male Asian skull: http://www.boneclones.com...

Human male Australian Aboriginal skull: http://www.boneclones.com...

Human male African skull: http://www.boneclones.com...
http://www.boneclones.com...

Human male European skull: http://www.boneclones.com...
http://www.boneclones.com...
http://www.boneclones.com...

Human Male Polynesian Skull: http://www.boneclones.com...

Comparative sets:

http://www.boneclones.com...

The debate isn't around whether race "exists." Existence is too general a term. The term "race" merely recognizes the physiological differences of individuals within the same sub-species. The debate is primarily semantic, over whether the physiological differences that characterize "races" are profound enough to warrant races being a formal taxonomic rank below subspecies.
"Where justice is denied, where poverty is enforced, where ignorance prevails, and where any one class is made to feel that society is an organized conspiracy to oppress, rob and degrade them, neither persons nor property will be safe." - Frederick Douglass
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
8/31/2015 8:16:13 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/13/2015 8:48:34 PM, Wylted wrote:
As most of us know the term race which is used to classify different groups of people is often used interchangeably with the term haplogroup. In a recent thread Brian the Liberal, said that haplogroup a are a social construct and don't actually exist?

I was wondering if anyone agrees with that statement or if there is any truth to what he is saying. http://www.debate.org...

Races do exist, but as any other taxonomic category, the concept is quite subjective, meaning the boundaries between races are quite diffuse and subjected to personal opinion. As I stated on the other thread, we can speak about a Canadian race if we want to, as long as we can find some set of traits that are significantly more frequent in Canadians than in other populations, which make for a characteristical, recognizable phenotype. As for "black, white or Asian" being races, well I believe that's the one thing that would be worth debating, not so much the "existence of races".

For example, African-americans are significantly more prone to body odor than Koreans (so are Caucasians, btw). This is not because Koreans are more hygienic than African-americans or Caucasians, but it is because of the larger frequency of allele A (no odor) from gene ABCC11 on Asians. This is a highly controversial topic on the West, but Asians it is such a regular knowledge for Asians, than Japanese companies commonly design deodorants for foreigners and deodorants for Japanese. This is also one of the causes why Koreans perceive sweat as sexy, but westerns perceive it as somehow nasty, because Koreans do not relate sweat to body odor. Pretty interesting stuff.