Post popular opinion

[Tongio]

Hitting the gym is the best way to get strong and fit.

Indeed its hard to grow much on calisthenics, i think thats a consensus.

[PlattitüdenPaule]

Indeed its hard to grow much on calisthenics, i think thats a consensus.

Manual labor is unbeatable.

[Roy]

Cats are beautiful creatures.

[Token]

Its not just about being obsolete because of time, many influencial physical anthropology ideas derive from distorted "studies" that aimed to reinforce or justify the superiority of a group, more often the nordics(Gobineau was among the most influencial with his racial theories).

Gobineau was not a anthropologist though, he was a politician and a erudite. Neither was Guenther who is probably the most famous Nordicist. It is true that many physical anthropologists were committed to theories of racial supremacism such as Nordicism, especially the Germans, but so were many medical doctors, sociologists, historians and philosophers, so your argument is rather fallacious. In Germany, many medical doctors were applying medical knowledge to prove the superiority of the Aryan race, does this invalidate the field of medicine? Racial supremacism was a sort of zeitgeist of the time and didn't only affect physical anthropology.

Conversely, the two foremost physical anthropologists of the 20th century, Earnest Hooton and Coon, were explicitly against any kind of racial supremacism. In the glossary of TRoE, for example, Coon writes: NORDICISM. The misuse of racial terminology for political purposes, based on the unproved assumption that Nordics are superior in mental and moral attributes to members of other races. Believe me, this was quite progressive in 20th century America.

Famous example is the whole dolichocephalic thing where they realised sub saharan africans and nordics had very similar headshapes and danced around with the data and conclusions because that was unaceptable fact.

Never heard of this, all anthropologists I've read were perfectly happy with calling both Nordics and some Negroids as dolichocephalic.

[bandoge]

oops i misunderstood the topic

[Tongio]

In Germany, many medical doctors were applying medical knowledge to prove the superiority of the Aryan race, does this invalidate the field of medicine? Racial supremacism was a sort of zeitgeist of the time and didn't only affect physical anthropology.

You do have a point, i dont think the entirety of physical anthropology is invalid, of course not, but in the medical fields distorting or using biased data have real consequences like killing or injuring a patient in anthropology its free real state.

Conversely, the two foremost physical anthropologists of the 20th century, Earnest Hooton and Coon, were explicitly against any kind of racial supremacism. In the glossary of TRoE, for example, Coon writes: NORDICISM. The misuse of racial terminology for political purposes, based on the unproved assumption that Nordics are superior in mental and moral attributes to members of other races. Believe me, this was quite progressive in 20th century America.

Never heard of this, all anthropologists I've read were perfectly happy with calling both Nordics and some Negroids as dolichocephalic.

You're right about Coon , but like i said 19th century , i am not calling his bunch out, you surely have read more than me so i take value on your observation, but i am referring here to the work of more early guys like for example, Samuel George Morton, he measured cranial Indexes and made It in a way to garantee anglo saxons would have the biggest(correlating the higher index with higher inteligence)he purposefully omitted the skulls of his colection that did not fit his criterias.
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiolog...l.pbio.2007008

[Token]

You do have a point, i dont think the entirety of physical anthropology is invalid, of course not, but in the medical fields distorting or using biased data have real consequences like killing or injuring a patient in anthropology its free real state.

I'm something of a Nietzschean/Foucaultian in this aspect, I don't believe in impersonal science detached from individual passions for good reasons. Ultimately even the so-called "scientific method" is a historical Western invention resting on several undemonstrable philosophical concepts such as the Aristotelic concept of causality, and more recently the Kantian concept of the transcendental individual, making "science" itself biased in its foundation. It is true that there are no life risks involved in physical anthropology, the same is true for most scientific fields (biology, history and even theoretical physics to cite some), but let's not underestimate the fear of ostracization in academia, arguably the most important cohesive force of modern science.

You're right about Coon , but like i said 19th century , i am not calling his bunch out, you surely have read more than me so i take value on your observation, but i am referring here to the work of more early guys like for example, Samuel George Morton, he measured cranial Indexes and made It in a way to garantee anglo saxons would have the biggest(correlating the higher index with higher inteligence)he purposefully omitted the skulls of his colection that did not fit his criterias.
https://journals.plos.org/plosbiolog...l.pbio.2007008

Interestingly the paper argues that the collected data wasn't biased at all as you claim, but the interpretation of it was:

The discovery of nearly 180-year-old cranial measurements in the archives of 19th century American physician and naturalist Samuel George Morton can address a lingering debate, begun in the late 20th century by paleontologist and historian of science Stephen Jay Gould, about the unconscious bias alleged in Morton’s comparative data of brain size in human racial groups. Analysis of Morton’s lost data and the records of his studies does not support Gould’s arguments about Morton’s biased data collection. However, historical contextualization of Morton with his scientific peers, especially German anatomist Friedrich Tiedemann, suggests that, while Morton’s data may have been unbiased, his cranial race science was not.

As for Dr. Samuel George Morton, the accuracy of his cranial measurements neither explains nor excuses the racism constitutive of his thought and its legacy, cautioning us to remember that “unbiased data” cannot be equated with unbiased science.

Biased interpretation of accurate data is again a problem in all scientific fields. Arguably even the concept of "unbiased" interpretation is ultimately a fantasy, a secularized version of the ascetic morality and a symptom of a debilitated will.

[Blondie]

South germans are darker than black africans.

[Kiel]

South germans are darker than black africans.

Southern Germans are a mix of black Africans and furries... Basic TA facts

[Richmondbread]

Only women like horses
Men don't gossip
You can't wear white after labor day
Q anon is a conspiracy
Youth is more important than wisdom
You can put off marriage and children until you're 35 and everything will be fine
College education matters