Culture as a consequence of the humans nature

[Tarniel98]

First of all:
Hello! My real Name is Patrick and I live in Germany.
In this thread I want to show my considerations refering to the question
Why do several cultures exist (without a being of human races)?
I read a few threads in that forum and my first impression is that there are lots of racists here. I respect their opinion but I want to analyse the topic "culture" and the connected topic "supremacy of a culture" on a "objectiv" rational way. I put objectiv in quotes for scepticists :).

1)Considerations based on the "Out-of-Africa-Theory":
The culture of a group of humans/tribe is primordially a "product" of the tribe's nature.
At this moment lots of cultures are existing, so there should be several "natures of humans" --> Races(?).
But forming a culture is a part of the human's nature.
The nature of the group is depending on the group's environment/conditions.
For example:

A tribe which is surrounded by vulcanos could form a connection to the vulcanos in their culture by building a god which is responsible for that vulcano. The people of the tribe/group had to suffer because of the vulcano's eruption, so they start to think what did they not, so that the "vulcano god" should be angry. A very obvious argumentation is that the god did that, because his necessities are not satisfied. Then they offer a sacrifice to the god (optional: and they realize that the vulcano did not erupt next month (random)).
So by paying attention to the these, that the nature of the humans is depending on the humans environment, it is possible, no there must be several cultures. The requirements for this these is the existing of groups of humans and the fact, that the all humans have the same first-origins.

2)A measure of Competition supports the progress of a tribe:
Lots of racists declare other tribes/nations as inferior, because of their technical deficit.
The best example to show how important competition is, is to show the progress of available weapons depending on the nation. In europe, there were lots of competition/wars between the kingdoms.
So when a kingdom does not want to lose, it has to be better than his enemies. The compulsion to develop better weapons constantly existed in europe, and the empirical datas show exactly that even european persons have invented lots of powerful weapons. The progress of weapons is only a example.

3)A nation consists of Individuals:
A nation is constisting of individuals, that means that every person is different related to the other.
A nation, whose people are showing lots of phenotypical characterstics, is a nation which has been developed without much influence of other nations (like I think the jewish society). This condition did never really exist in europe, even because of the wars/competition which brang progress. So real races do not exist.

Considerations based on the Multiregional origin of modern humans are following

[de Burgh II]

"Whole genome comparisons identified introgression from
archaic to modern humans. Our analysis of highly
polymorphic HLA class I, vital immune system
components subject to strong balancing selection, shows
how modern humans acquired the HLA-B*73 allele in
west Asia through admixture with archaic humans called
Denisovans, a likely sister group to the Neandertals.
Virtual genotyping of Denisovan and Neandertal genomes
identified archaic HLA haplotypes carrying functionally
distinctive alleles that have introgressed into modern
Eurasian and Oceanian populations. These alleles, of
which several encode unique or strong ligands for natural
killer cell receptors, now represent more than half the
HLA alleles of modern Eurasians and also appear to have
been later introduced into Africans. Thus, adaptive
introgression of archaic alleles has significantly shaped
modern human immune systems.
Whether or not interbreeding occurred between archaic and
modern humans has long been debated (1, 2). Recent
estimates suggest that Neandertals contributed 1-4% to
modern Eurasian genomes (3) and Denisovans, a likely sister
group to the Neandertals, contributed 4-6% to modern
Melanesian genomes (4)."
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1122&context=publichealthresources

I just wanted to say that I agree with you to an extent that the tribal mentality was influenced by environmental factors (e.g. parental upbringing) and that were within the same species spectrum since we can breed between other races whereas separate species render the offspring sterile (e.g. tiger + lion= liger). I can commend you for that logic from what you said which is true in its own right.

The thing that caught my eye that seemed baseless and simplistic in nature is that "there are no human races" which I guess you could say is prevalent with the popularized idea the media tries to condition within our mentalities. Lets take our heads out of the mentality for a second before we start spewing our own mental bias and starting a nonsensical flame war just to conform with our own mental bias that strays away from the topic at hand.

We can agree upon that we as humans are within the same species spectrum, yes? But, we can't undermine the reality that in both Eurasian and Melanesian populations that there is archaic admixture that makes each respective population on this earth is "distinct" in their own ways that we can deem as different "races." in that respect. Something that something that we perceive with hostile bias because we are so accustomed to going with the popularized notion because it doesn't conform with the standardized view in some societies where you could say where multiculturalism/globalization is prevalent.

To address the "racist card" I like to call it that globalized societies like to use since it more popularized than mono-culture societies. It true that some people can be racist in their own respect, but can you really blame them where the elites true to dismantle the integrity of a person's own respective culture with multiculturalism? Sure in its own right it helps you get to respect other cultures but its a simplistic facade for something more self destructive in nature.

We have to realize that some cultures can't work with one another and the only thing multiculturalism benefits are the elite's greed and leaving the working class to fend for themselves. Some may be wondering, " thats bull$*!&! Multiculturalism always works!" Where this response would be rooting off one's ignorance or being brainwashed with a popularized idea. Look at America for example, there are some people that can assimilate and there are those that can't so it can go both ways in that respect. The reality is that there will never be a utopia in this world.

Even if we were to assimilate in one dominant culture worldwide, understanding that there are over 8 billion people that slowly over the course of time mix their genetic makeup with difference races you bet your life on that both recessive and dominant genes will pop up in different generations one way or another. What do you think will happen when everyone is confused about their identity depending on how deep the insecurity is? The person will discriminate against the other distinct person one way or another; its inevitable. It only takes one person to make the "powder keg" explode so to speak.

Look at people nowadays; you haves your "Blasians", "Latinos", "Mulattos" that have their own distinct sense which is no different then other people comprised of one race.... since their mixed does that make "superior" or dominant then asians, blacks, australoids or caucasians? No, it doesn't because no matter if your mixed or not; everyone is equal in their own right. It doesn't give mixed people or people composed of one race the right to thing their better than one another but, alas, its inevitable since we will conflict with others one way or another.

Whether the person is one of the popularized mixed identities above or composed of one race its natural for people to identify with what they instinctively perceive is genetically and culturally compatible with them is to be respect in its own way. Its part of the "tribal mentality" to be with your own because its preserves the integrity of the diversity of the world as we know it... which should stay that way so we can have rich, distinct cultures that each country has; which again should be respected for what it is. Look around you; there other different diversity among species of birds, reptiles and mammals etc. Should we make polar bears become obsolete because grizzly bears are more "superior".... the answer is no.

If a person doesn't like another distinct culture... then, just leave them alone and connect with your own respective culture.... simple as that...

[Tarniel98]

I don't know if I unterstand your text well (not the best english-skills), but I think you state that there is an archaic genotype-combination, don't you?
There are superior Individuals, such like Aristotheles, Kant, Euler etc... but there are lots of persons who have potential to be smart, too but they don't have the possibility to discover/use that.
Lots of smart individuals in the history were german, but that does not mean that the whole Germans are a superior race.

[Hàkon]

I think you will agree that by adapting to the environment, a species can be broken into groups of subspecies, races, due the evolution that comes of the development of ecological niches. Genetical changes take effect when the strains of an environment surpass a species adaptability.

Applied to humans, we could call our differences in culture and phenotypes products of niches, but we humans having reached our state of versatility, contributing to our adaptability, the gradation of the genetical variation that has come of environmental adaptation is very smooth and therefore, oftentimes, considered insignificant. A notion that is arguable, still.

So, in order to clarify, the argument for the existence of human races should not to be misinterpreted as a debate on racial superiority.

[Tarniel98]

Thanks to all these objective responses.
I do not really decline Races, but I decline a classifying into inferior/superior races. Thats what I meant with racists. But the Genes arent only changing when the strains of the environment surpass the adaptability, they are also changing withiout a real target (random Mutation).
And in 10tenhousand of years these changes are not only smooth, they are responsible for the human diversity.

[Tarniel98]

Posted by mistake.