Here’s a set of beliefs that seem to be widely held among researchers in genetics, and others. 1. Many groups in society are genetically different from each other. The shy have genetic differences from the sociable, the fat from the thin, the tall from the short, and even the rich from the poor.
The "black pill" PUA community has a good way to solve this: "Chads are their own ethnicity". Or in other words, the genetic essences of fitness (intelligence, neuroticism, empathy, height, obesity, strength) transcends beyond, or are orthogonal to, ethnic phenotypes. https://youtu.be/gK1w1cAKS7o?t=694
Also two things that needs to be addressed about ethnicity and genetics: (a) that subcontinental difference are stronger than national difference due to migration or lack thereof, and globalization is likely to disrupt selective pressure in the short term. (b) genetic essence are a materialist construct, which is coupled to "ability of ceasing the means of production" or "strength of human capital", and not a purely cultural/social constructed one.
My understanding had been that ethnicity is cultural (how you were raised), while race is genetic (who your biological parents were). So an adopted person could easily have a different ethnicity than their race.
Saying ethnicity is a "primordial genetic essence" is not correct, and could only probably only be supported by someone who believed in creationism. I don't know of people who support this view. There would seem to be a big gap between this idea and the idea that ethnicity is merely social constructed.
I find "socially constructed" to be a bit of an ambiguous idea, but lets grant that a the value of a currency note is socially constructed. People also mean ancestory when they are talking about ethnicity - another issue of ambiguity. Even if we say that ethnicity is entirely social, you would have to concede that it correlates with ancestory. I think that if something is merely socially constructed, you shouldn't be able to make good predictions if you have someone's genome. In this way, ethnicity seems more like the dollar note. If someone gives their 23&Me results, I can say something meaningful about their ethnicity in most cases. If you think that doesn't indicate that it's not socially constructed, then what is a falsifiable way to determine social construction?
The "black pill" PUA community has a good way to solve this: "Chads are their own ethnicity". Or in other words, the genetic essences of fitness (intelligence, neuroticism, empathy, height, obesity, strength) transcends beyond, or are orthogonal to, ethnic phenotypes. https://youtu.be/gK1w1cAKS7o?t=694
Also two things that needs to be addressed about ethnicity and genetics: (a) that subcontinental difference are stronger than national difference due to migration or lack thereof, and globalization is likely to disrupt selective pressure in the short term. (b) genetic essence are a materialist construct, which is coupled to "ability of ceasing the means of production" or "strength of human capital", and not a purely cultural/social constructed one.
My understanding had been that ethnicity is cultural (how you were raised), while race is genetic (who your biological parents were). So an adopted person could easily have a different ethnicity than their race.
Saying ethnicity is a "primordial genetic essence" is not correct, and could only probably only be supported by someone who believed in creationism. I don't know of people who support this view. There would seem to be a big gap between this idea and the idea that ethnicity is merely social constructed.
I find "socially constructed" to be a bit of an ambiguous idea, but lets grant that a the value of a currency note is socially constructed. People also mean ancestory when they are talking about ethnicity - another issue of ambiguity. Even if we say that ethnicity is entirely social, you would have to concede that it correlates with ancestory. I think that if something is merely socially constructed, you shouldn't be able to make good predictions if you have someone's genome. In this way, ethnicity seems more like the dollar note. If someone gives their 23&Me results, I can say something meaningful about their ethnicity in most cases. If you think that doesn't indicate that it's not socially constructed, then what is a falsifiable way to determine social construction?