Re: RE: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-10 Thread Brad De Long
Brad,can you please read the rest of Steve's post, or the sentence that prior to the sentence you cite? since Steve is not here, I can not talk on behalf of him, but his work is an excellent piece in Marxian sociology. Here's a precious snippet from this nitwit (Steve Rosenthal) from a couple

Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread md7148
On Sun, 9 Apr 2000, Mine Aysen Doyran wrote: the socio-biological claim that people differ because they differ genetically is called RACISM, which is what Wilson does eventually. This is the crux of the matter. If one supposes that culture is determined by genes, then one is left explaining

RE: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread Max B. Sawicky
Brad,can you please read the rest of Steve's post, or the sentence that prior to the sentence you cite? since Steve is not here, I can not talk on behalf of him, but his work is an excellent piece in Marxian sociology. Here's a precious snippet from this nitwit (Steve Rosenthal) from a couple of

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread JKSCHW
In a message dated 00-04-09 00:04:25 EDT, you write: the socio-biological claim that people differ because they differ genetically is called RACISM, No it's not. It would be racist (and genetically illiterate, for the most part) to say that some groups of people are inferior to another

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread Mathew Forstater
ge- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Sunday, April 09, 2000 10:46 AM Subject: [PEN-L:17872] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd) In a message dated 00-04-09 00:04:25 EDT, you write: the socio-biological claim that people differ beca

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread JKSCHW
In a message dated 00-04-09 12:38:32 EDT, you write: the sentence that includes the categories "Black people" and "whites" uncritically assumes that these term themselves are unproblematic with regard to the very issues the sentence is discussing. which individuals end up in the "Black"

Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread md7148
This is the heart of the matter; very clear and to the point! Andrew Wayne Austin wrote: I do not believe sociobiology can be progressive. It is inherently reactionary, no matter what spin its advocates put to it. And even if we could put politics aside (in some theoretical world) it is

RE: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread md7148
Brad,can you please read the rest of Steve's post, or the sentence that prior to the sentence you cite? since Steve is not here, I can not talk on behalf of him, but his work is an excellent piece in Marxian sociology. Here's a precious snippet from this nitwit (Steve Rosenthal) from a couple

RE: RE: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-09 Thread Max B. Sawicky
MD: . . . What I understand is that Economic Policy Institute may have a finger in socio-biological research . . . We don't do sociology we don't do biology. I would wager that the word 'socio-biology' does not appear in one EPI publication. I don't even know what it means, but if you don't

Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-08 Thread Mine Aysen Doyran
Steve wrote: Because of these sharp critiques, Wilson reinvented himself as an environmentalist concerned about bio-diversity. Brad replied: If it is an excellent piece of Marxian sociology, why does it make false claims about Wilson's intellectual development? Either Steve

Of Steve Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: genome news (fwd)

2000-04-08 Thread Stephen E Philion
For the record, the Steve referred to below is Steve Rosenthal, not me... Steve (The "PEN Steve") Stephen Philion Lecturer/PhD Candidate Department of Sociology 2424 Maile Way Social Sciences Bldg. # 247 Honolulu, HI 96822 On Sat, 8 Apr 2000, Mine Aysen Doyran wrote: Steve wrote: