Bearcat (
Sat, 4 Feb 1995 22:31:29 GMT wrote:
: (S. LaBonne) wrote:

: > Obviously it is in a sociolgical sense, but sociological
: > concepts of race have always had illegitimate sources of support in
: > the popular fallacy that "races" have an objective biological meaning.

: No, not a sociological sense, a common sense. If you have eyes
: to see the tension between blacks and whites, you have eyes to
: see blacks and whites.

You realize that you have just described a sociological phenomenon?
Common sense would dictate that one have the wherewithal to
distinguish the sociological from the biological.

: There's no avoiding the distinction unless
: you want to bury your head in the sand. There's no point in
: projecting your fantasies about the "objective biological meaning"
: of races on everyone who discusses race in the U.S.

Feel free to discuss race. Just understand that it is a word
that is completely lacking a scientific definition. It is a
social construct. The source of all racial strife is societal,
and the solutions to these problems are societal as well.

To ignore these facts is to bury your head in the sand. You
are just projecting your fantasies about "race" onto everyone
you see.

- Bearcat