[superMAUS]

It's not inherently important to have a successful society but it helps. Arguably every modern breakthrough can be attributed to racial diversity, in the sense that the sharing of ideas and ideals and the way this forces comparison of those ideas and ideals is helpful.

A racially diverse society doesn't necessarily relate at all to any debate regarding positive discrimination I saw mentioned in previous threads.

Frankly though, in order to have the most interesting society, racial diversity (assuming this carries with it cultural diversity) is beneficial.

EDIT: Having read some of your posts you attempt to differentiate racial diversity and cultural diversity which I think is strange. If we are to imagine a society were races differ but the culture is homogeneous then debate would have to be surrounding genetics, and the pseudosciences accompanying that. In the real world though it is impossible not to talk about the merits of a racially diverse society without mentioning cultural difference. An obvious example: Blacks in America have been around for ages since they were imported from Africa and yet they maintain a clearly defined African-American culture. The merits of a racially diverse society are all based around the benefits of a culturally diverse society.

[meow]

It's not inherently important to have a successful society but it helps. Arguably every modern breakthrough can be attributed to racial diversity, in the sense that the sharing of ideas and ideals and the way this forces comparison of those ideas and ideals is helpful.

A racially diverse society doesn't necessarily relate at all to any debate regarding positive discrimination I saw mentioned in previous threads.

Frankly though, in order to have the most interesting society, racial diversity (assuming this carries with it cultural diversity)  is beneficial.

EDIT: Having read some of your posts you attempt to differentiate racial diversity and cultural diversity which I think is strange. If we are to imagine a society were races differ but the culture is homogeneous then debate would have to be surrounding genetics, and the pseudosciences accompanying that. In the real world though it is impossible not to talk about the merits of a racially diverse society without mentioning cultural difference. An obvious example: Blacks in America have been around for ages since they were imported from Africa and yet they maintain a clearly defined African-American culture. The merits of a racially diverse society are all based around the benefits of a culturally diverse society.

I don't have to "attempt" to differentiate cultural and racial diversity, they are two different things. Your race defines the color of your skin and it is something you can't chose, your culture is a set of ideals and traditions which you do chose to adopt. If I'm reading between the lines correctly, what you're saying when you say racial diversity = cultural diversity is that people born to a certain race are automatically forced into a certain culture with no choice to adopt others, which is ridiculous. And yes, I'm aware of the "African-American" culture (you realize it contains more than just black people, right?), and it is absolutely toxic. It's ironic how you put "benefits of a culturally diverse society" and "African-american culture" in the same paragraph. Just about the only benefit from african-american culture is rap music. African-american culture is responsible for the fact that %13 of the US population (black men) is responsible for over %50 of the homicides there, it is responsible for terrorist movements like BLM and Black Panthers, it is responsible for the massive number of gangs, the list goes on. Yes, I'm aware good black people exist, but that only happens when they don't choose to adopt the African-American culture, who would've thought?

The only kind of diversity that matters is diversity of thought, end of story. I don't care about your race or ethnic background, but if you think differently from everyone else (in a good way), you are valuable.

@superMAUS, watch these if you'd like to have your opinion changed very quickly.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_cUDl_LEtak
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fo6uBBmpS9I

Arguably every modern breakthrough can be attributed to racial diversity

Citation needed.

---

Precisely.

Just adding to this (generally speaking), If not for the Italians, you won't have any concrete In your driveway. If not for the Turks, you won't be eating kebabs. If not for the Greeks, they'd be no TV repairs. There's good and bad In everyone, therefore I don't judge people by race.

All of that has to do with culture and ethnic background, nothing to do at all with race. Turkish is not a race, Greek is not a race, Italian is not a race. Try again.

[superMAUS]

If I'm reading between the lines correctly, what you're saying when you say racial diversity = cultural diversity is that people born to a certain race are automatically forced into a certain culture with no choice to adopt others, which is ridiculous.

Your not "forced" into a certain culture at birth, but you have an inherent connection with that culture, this shouldn't even be a point of contention it's just obvious. The idea that you have no links or ties and stop being a part of the culture you were born into is not the case in the vast majority of cases. The vast majority of people are attached to their culture from birth, and that
's not at all a ridiculous thing to say.

But if you don't want to talk about cultural diversity then where the hell did you think this debate would go? As I said before, unless you subscribe to ideas surrounding racial superiority, then a society with a homogeneous culture but differing races would neither be disadvantaged nor advantaged by differing races.

EDIT: Saw your links, thanks. I'll check out the debate & lecture.

[meow]

If I'm reading between the lines correctly, what you're saying when you say racial diversity = cultural diversity is that people born to a certain race are automatically forced into a certain culture with no choice to adopt others, which is ridiculous.

Your not "forced" into a certain culture at birth,  but you have an inherent connection with that culture, this shouldn't even be a point of contention it's just obvious. The idea that you have no links or ties and stop being a part of  the culture you were born into is not the case in the vast majority of cases. The vast majority of people  are attached to their culture from birth, and that;s not at all a ridiculous thing to say.

This is where the hole in your logic comes in. You can argue semantics all you want, but race doesn't have to have anything to do with that culture that someone is born into. Let's say an Indian man and woman who have moved to America and adopted American culture have a child, who is also Indian obviously. In America, this would be racial diversity, but not cultural diversity. This comes back to the thing I've been saying for 29384 posts now, racial diversity does not equal cultural diversity. One could argue that "most blacks adopt African-american culture, therefore race and culture are inevitably linked", but that would be implying correlation implies causation, which isn't true at all.

Also, you are making the fallacious assumption that because one is born into a culture, one must obviously keep a part of that culture sticking to them, which isn't true. If you think you can prove me wrong then go ahead.

[superMAUS]

If I'm reading between the lines correctly, what you're saying when you say racial diversity = cultural diversity is that people born to a certain race are automatically forced into a certain culture with no choice to adopt others, which is ridiculous.

Your not "forced" into a certain culture at birth,  but you have an inherent connection with that culture, this shouldn't even be a point of contention it's just obvious. The idea that you have no links or ties and stop being a part of  the culture you were born into is not the case in the vast majority of cases. The vast majority of people  are attached to their culture from birth, and that;s not at all a ridiculous thing to say.

This is where the hole in your logic comes in. You can argue semantics all you want, but race doesn't have to have anything to do with that culture that someone is born into. Let's say an Indian man and woman who have moved to America and adopted American culture have a child, who is also Indian obviously. In America, this would be racial diversity, but not cultural diversity.

I think your kidding yourself if you think this happens in the majority of cases. The idea that the child would be raised without Indian culture in the majority of cases is wacky. Sure the family could adopt American culture but that doesn't mean that that Indian culture is thrown out the window. Do you really think that your example is reflective of the the majority of instances like this?

This comes back to the thing I've been saying for 29384 posts now, racial diversity does not equal cultural diversity. One could argue that "most blacks adopt African-american culture, therefore race and culture are inevitably linked", but that would be implying correlation implies causation, which isn't true at all.

Also, you are making the fallacious assumption that because one is born into a culture, one must obviously keep a part of that culture sticking to them, which isn't true. If you think you can prove me wrong then go ahead.

Why are you arguing what seems to be, on both sides of politics, counter intuitive. There is obvious correlation between race and culture, how many Caucasians eat samosas with regularity?

[meow]

Your not "forced" into a certain culture at birth,  but you have an inherent connection with that culture, this shouldn't even be a point of contention it's just obvious. The idea that you have no links or ties and stop being a part of  the culture you were born into is not the case in the vast majority of cases. The vast majority of people  are attached to their culture from birth, and that;s not at all a ridiculous thing to say.

This is where the hole in your logic comes in. You can argue semantics all you want, but race doesn't have to have anything to do with that culture that someone is born into. Let's say an Indian man and woman who have moved to America and adopted American culture have a child, who is also Indian obviously. In America, this would be racial diversity, but not cultural diversity.

I think your kidding yourself if you think this happens in the majority of cases. The idea that the child would be raised without Indian culture in the majority of cases is wacky. Sure the family could adopt American culture but that doesn't mean that that Indian culture is thrown out the window. Do you really think that your example is reflective of the the majority of instances like this?

This comes back to the thing I've been saying for 29384 posts now, racial diversity does not equal cultural diversity. One could argue that "most blacks adopt African-american culture, therefore race and culture are inevitably linked", but that would be implying correlation implies causation, which isn't true at all.

Also, you are making the fallacious assumption that because one is born into a culture, one must obviously keep a part of that culture sticking to them, which isn't true. If you think you can prove me wrong then go ahead.

Why are you arguing what seems to be, on both sides of politics, counter intuitive. There is obvious correlation between race and culture, how many Caucasians eat samosas with regularity?

I never said that happens in the majority if cases, nor did I imply it. You think race = culture and I gave you a hypothetical scenario which would prove you wrong. Once again, you are making the fallacious assumption that because someone is born into a certain culture, that person must carry said culture with them at all times to some degree. If you can somehow provide legitimate evidence to support that statement then we can agree and move on, but until then, you are wrong.

There is obvious correlation between race and culture, how many Caucasians eat samosas with regularity?

Did you bother to read what I said, like, at all? I clearly stated that there is correlation, what I also said is correlation does not imply causation, to say otherwise would be a post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy.

[Nyx]

You can ask for a source and I can provide it or you can keep pretending I'm wrong and making yourself look stupid by posting memes. I win either way so I'll let you pick your poison.

oshit this nigga serious

Go on then, what's your source?

These are statistical sources, mind you (numbers don't lie). If you say "institutional racism" just be prepared for me to tell you to kill yourself.

http://www.iq-tests.eu/iq-test-IQ-correlations-700.html
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015...main-large
http://www.rense.com/general79/dut.htm
http://www.rense.com/general77/racedif.htm
https://libertarianrealist.blogspot.com/...tions.html (yeah I know it's a blog, but just look at the charts)
http://www.jbhe.com/latest/news/1-22-09/...figure.gif

If you want to know why Africans will always be on bottom with regards to intellect, I can provide you several scientific sources for that (science doesn't lie either).

---

Oh look, two people voted in the poll without saying why because they're afraid of their opinions being challenged. How great.

There are many different factors in this. You could look at the quality of life in the places where these different ethnic groups live (for obvious reasons, your average African American is going to have a lower quality of life compared to a Caucasian person) and also the culture in their different ethnic group (Asian parenting, although a stereotype, is generally very schooling focused compared to every other race). Therefore I wouldn't say that the genetics alone factor into intelligence, although quality of genes passed down do have an effect but that in turn comes back down to how the parents, grandparents etc were raised. Your average Asian has lineage to Monks who very intellectual and had (have?) a decent quality of life, and African Americans have lineage to slaves who were treated very poorly and most of which couldn't even read.

A few sources to studies which looked at the correlation to health/well being and intelligence can be found below. For obvious reasons I don't think sources for the correlation of parenting and intelligence is needed, though if you want I can find credible sources.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3461472/
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/dis...4502000119

---

Shit forgot to reply about the main topic. There are definitely pros to having racial diversity such as exposure to the cultures of different races and meeting people from different socioeconomic backgrounds, however those are the only 2 benefits worth noting, and those benefits don't make racial diversity 'important' as the poll is titled. Definitely nice to have in a society, however important: no. That is my reasoning behind my poll vote. Would love 2 debates, haven't actually had an intellectual debate in a long time instead of talking about Hillary vs Trump.

[Jiggly]

Lol, what?

You're confusing cultural diversity and racial diversity. Two completely different things.

Too broad a term? It literally means "diversity of race", is it truly too broad to debate or is it just that you're too close-minded to debate it?

This thread was made for the purpose of debating whether racial diversity is a good thing and if it serves any real purpose - this applies to every place/thing which requires and/or wants racial diversity (e.g. the workplace). No need for another thread.

Okay. Name 5.

What are you questioning about the first statement?
I know the difference between the two. However, they are often interlinked and that is one aspect that I had in mind.
Of course the "diversity of race" is broad in regards to a debate topic. In what context out of the many globally did you want to debate racial diversity? Do you want to talk about it historically? Do you want to discuss it's effects on the workplace? Or socially? Or in politics? Do you think this affects education in both curriculum and in the social environment of a school? Do you think people place different values on racial diversity depending on the country or region that they live in? No need to answer these - They are just thoughts.

Personally, I feel like I could talk for days about this. I don't understand where you get "close-minded" from.  I don't really want to debate something when there's so many ways to look at it, it's not as interesting and people usually go off-topic. I am also the type of person who will always try to look at things from both sides.

My personal feelings about racial diversity are driven by my experiences surrounding it in all the different areas I've lived. Most of these experiences have left a positive impact on my life. This, of course, will not be the case for everybody.

What I was trying to say in my post is that I would be more interested in debating a more specific topic. Since you've already made this one, obviously I'm not expecting you to now go make more. I mentioned it as an idea for the next member who wants to post a debate topic. I find that debate threads on this forum can get tedious.

---

Okay. Wasn't sure if this was the kind of thing where both is implied since racial diversity and cultural diversity will sometimes imply the other. I'll be on my way.

I was of a similar mind as they can come hand in hand. But at least we know now that wasn't the goal of this thread.

What are you questioning about the first statement?

I am questioning it because it is utterly wrong. Nobody is confusing racial diversity with political correctness.

I know the difference between the two. However, they are often interlinked and that is one aspect that I had in mind.
Of course the "diversity of race" is broad in regards to a debate topic. In what context out of the many globally did you want to debate racial diversity? Do you want to talk about it historically? Do you want to discuss it's effects on the workplace? Or socially? Or in politics? Do you think this affects education in both curriculum and in the social environment of a school? Do you think people place different values on racial diversity depending on the country or region that they live in? No need to answer these - They are just thoughts.

No matter the setting, be it the workplace, politics, schools - racial diversity only means one thing and one thing only. The setting does not change that, how hard is that for you to grasp?

Let me rephrase my statement since you're not seeming to get it - Is variety of skin color "good" anywhere and does it serve any real purpose anywhere? Why or why not?

I was actually joking when I said that as there is a common saying "It's political correctness gone mad!" and I was trying to subtley refer to it. It's a failed joke, don't worry about it.

Race implies more than a reference to skin colour alone. It implies origins and nationalities, differences in appearance beyond just skin tone and it implies a whole mix of social and historical thoughts. If you are talking about a skin tone, then there is no good or bad. It's a colour. Skin tone is not = to race. Race is more than that. The word itself has evolved its definition over time.

Rather than have a go at everyone who didn't pick exactly what you meant, skin tone and not any of the other things that a majority of the responses on this thread picked up on, why didn't you simply clarify it early on?

There is no need to belittle people. You're clearly smarter than that.

[meow]

What are you questioning about the first statement?
I know the difference between the two. However, they are often interlinked and that is one aspect that I had in mind.
Of course the "diversity of race" is broad in regards to a debate topic. In what context out of the many globally did you want to debate racial diversity? Do you want to talk about it historically? Do you want to discuss it's effects on the workplace? Or socially? Or in politics? Do you think this affects education in both curriculum and in the social environment of a school? Do you think people place different values on racial diversity depending on the country or region that they live in? No need to answer these - They are just thoughts.

Personally, I feel like I could talk for days about this. I don't understand where you get "close-minded" from.  I don't really want to debate something when there's so many ways to look at it, it's not as interesting and people usually go off-topic. I am also the type of person who will always try to look at things from both sides.

My personal feelings about racial diversity are driven by my experiences surrounding it in all the different areas I've lived. Most of these experiences have left a positive impact on my life. This, of course, will not be the case for everybody.

What I was trying to say in my post is that I would be more interested in debating a more specific topic. Since you've already made this one, obviously I'm not expecting you to now go make more. I mentioned it as an idea for the next member who wants to post a debate topic. I find that debate threads on this forum can get tedious.

---

I was of a similar mind as they can come hand in hand. But at least we know now that wasn't the goal of this thread.

What are you questioning about the first statement?

I am questioning it because it is utterly wrong. Nobody is confusing racial diversity with political correctness.

I know the difference between the two. However, they are often interlinked and that is one aspect that I had in mind.
Of course the "diversity of race" is broad in regards to a debate topic. In what context out of the many globally did you want to debate racial diversity? Do you want to talk about it historically? Do you want to discuss it's effects on the workplace? Or socially? Or in politics? Do you think this affects education in both curriculum and in the social environment of a school? Do you think people place different values on racial diversity depending on the country or region that they live in? No need to answer these - They are just thoughts.

No matter the setting, be it the workplace, politics, schools - racial diversity only means one thing and one thing only. The setting does not change that, how hard is that for you to grasp?

Let me rephrase my statement since you're not seeming to get it - Is variety of skin color "good" anywhere and does it serve any real purpose anywhere? Why or why not?

I was actually joking when I said that as there is a common saying "It's political correctness gone mad!" and I was trying to subtley refer to it. It's a failed joke, don't worry about it.

Race implies more than a reference to skin colour alone. It implies origins and nationalities, differences in appearance beyond just skin tone and it implies a whole mix of social and historical thoughts. If you are talking about a skin tone, then there is no good or bad. It's a colour. Skin tone is not = to race. Race is more than that. The word itself has evolved its definition over time.

Rather than have a go at everyone who didn't pick exactly what you meant, skin tone and not any of the other things that a majority of the responses on this thread picked up on, why didn't you simply clarify it early on?

There is no need to belittle people. You're clearly smarter than that.

I reworded it incorrectly then, my mistake. Either way, whether I reworded it correctly or not, race and culture are not the same thing. That is not a difficult concept to fathom.

---

oshit this nigga serious

Go on then, what's your source?

These are statistical sources, mind you (numbers don't lie). If you say "institutional racism" just be prepared for me to tell you to kill yourself.

http://www.iq-tests.eu/iq-test-IQ-correlations-700.html
https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2015...main-large
http://www.rense.com/general79/dut.htm
http://www.rense.com/general77/racedif.htm
https://libertarianrealist.blogspot.com/...tions.html (yeah I know it's a blog, but just look at the charts)
http://www.jbhe.com/latest/news/1-22-09/...figure.gif

If you want to know why Africans will always be on bottom with regards to intellect, I can provide you several scientific sources for that (science doesn't lie either).

---

Oh look, two people voted in the poll without saying why because they're afraid of their opinions being challenged. How great.

There are many different factors in this. You could look at the quality of life in the places where these different ethnic groups live (for obvious reasons, your average African American is going to have a lower quality of life compared to a Caucasian person) and also the culture in their different ethnic group (Asian parenting, although a stereotype, is generally very schooling focused compared to every other race). Therefore I wouldn't say that the genetics alone factor into intelligence, although quality of genes passed down do have an effect but that in turn comes back down to how the parents, grandparents etc were raised. Your average Asian has lineage to Monks who very intellectual and had (have?) a decent quality of life, and African Americans have lineage to slaves who were treated very poorly and most of which couldn't even read.

A few sources to studies which looked at the correlation to health/well being and intelligence can be found below. For obvious reasons I don't think sources for the correlation of parenting and intelligence is needed, though if you want I can find credible sources.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3461472/
http://journals.cambridge.org/action/dis...4502000119

---

This is gonna be my last reply to this thread. EDIT: I'm actually going to close it, if anyone would like to discuss these kinds of things with me further they can PM me.

[Jiggly]

I am questioning it because it is utterly wrong. Nobody is confusing racial diversity with political correctness.


No matter the setting, be it the workplace, politics, schools - racial diversity only means one thing and one thing only. The setting does not change that, how hard is that for you to grasp?

Let me rephrase my statement since you're not seeming to get it - Is variety of skin color "good" anywhere and does it serve any real purpose anywhere? Why or why not?

I was actually joking when I said that as there is a common saying "It's political correctness gone mad!" and I was trying to subtley refer to it. It's a failed joke, don't worry about it.

Race implies more than a reference to skin colour alone. It implies origins and nationalities, differences in appearance beyond just skin tone and it implies a whole mix of social and historical thoughts. If you are talking about a skin tone, then there is no good or bad. It's a colour. Skin tone is not = to race. Race is more than that. The word itself has evolved its definition over time.

Rather than have a go at everyone who didn't pick exactly what you meant, skin tone and not any of the other things that a majority of the responses on this thread picked up on, why didn't you simply clarify it early on?

There is no need to belittle people. You're clearly smarter than that.

I reworded it incorrectly then, my mistake. Either way, whether I reworded it correctly or not, race and culture are not the same thing. That is not a difficult concept to fathom.

Oh look, two people voted in the poll without saying why because they're afraid of their opinions being challenged. How great.

If you weren't being so rude about it people would want to join in more.

I never said they were the same, I said they interlink.

---

I'm going to leave this thread for now. We ended up having a debate but about the topic for discussion not the original reason for the thread! Oops!