What do you think of psychological descriptions to anthropological types?

[Mortimer]

Hans Günther

He describes the nordic type, also the faelid type as "righteous" for example



That he was a european/white/german himself and stood near the nationalsocialists, certainly made him bias, but most other anthropologists too also english, white americans, french, etc. of course they would glorify european types and the nordic type as epitome of everything good, lets say a afro-american wrote that, it would be labled and laughed as afro-centrism?

Is that really science or just pseudo-science like astrology?

[fortress europe]

LOL It seems this screenshot was an inspiration for you to post it here.
I think there might be certain degree of truth to link psychological characteristics to subracial groups. Maybe it´s all made-up pseudo-science, but interesting to look at.
I´m sure there are regional differences among Europeans in temperament.
When reading the description of the Phalian soul in German they are described not as the typical "chads" they physcially appear to be.
According to the German authors they described them as people with essentially good heart, but very, very naive. They look tough and rough outside, but their core is in fact soft. It says they get hurt and used by bad people a lot and they take life very seriously. It says they tend towards depression.
I haven´t read much about the other races yet.

[Mortimer]

LOL It seems this screenshot was an inspiration for you to post it here.
I think there might be certain degree of truth to link psychological characteristics to subracial groups. Maybe it´s all made-up pseudo-science, but interesting to look at.
I´m sure there are regional differences among Europeans in temperament.
When reading the description of the Phalian soul in German they are described not as the typical "chads" they physcially appear to be.
According to the German authors they described them as people with essentially good heart, but very, very naive. They look tough and rough outside, but their core is in fact soft. It says they get hurt and used by bad people a lot and they take life very seriously. It says they tend towards depression.
I haven´t read much about the other races yet.

Yes you are a great inspiration i think its a good thread good question

[rothaer]

Hans Günther

He describes the nordic type, also the faelid type as "righteous" for example



That he was a european/white/german himself and stood near the nationalsocialists, certainly made him bias, but most other anthropologists too also english, white americans, french, etc. of course they would glorify european types and the nordic type as epitome of everything good, lets say a afro-american wrote that, it would be labled and laughed as afro-centrism?

Is that really science or just pseudo-science like astrology?

Regardless of that these things are not graspable as hard facts like bone measurements they are even the by far most relevant part of any racial science. The psyche connected to a race (Rassenseele in German) is what makes living conditions in various countries different, not the form of a nose or the skin colour, ofc.

So having thoughts on these questions is the most important thing.

On the other hand, the assignment of psycholoigical traits to an anthropological subrace is very hard, in particular when most individuals are „mixtures“ (rather intermediate forms) of subraces anyway. Not principially but in the procedure of assignment these things easily become somewhat arbitrary.

It has to be noted that Günther did not base his assignments on any scientific examinations but on his (essentially skilled) impressions and perceptions.

And yet another thing: If Günther defines subraces including the psyche this will always and per definition be „correct“. The remaining question is just if a defined like that subrace is a meaningful to be assumed entity.

[fortress europe]

Der Ochsenknecht

[Tauromachos]

If so what plays a greater role for the psychological type?
The anthropolical phenotype or the genetics because people of different anthrotype can belong to the same genetic stock.

[rothaer]

If so what plays a greater role for the psychological type?
The anthropolical phenotype or the genetics because people of different anthrotype can belong to the same genetic stock.

Genetics.

After SNPs and thus traits are inherited independently the SNPs responsible for someone's anthropological phenotype have no direct relation to the SNPs causning mental traits.

But in case of that you speak of populations that have been isolated from each other for a long time (Subsaharan Africans, East Asians etc.) you will have a (statistically, not causally) strong correlation between the athropological phenotype and mental traits.

[fortress europe]

Genetics.

After SNPs and thus traits are inherited independently the SNPs responsible for someone's anthropological phenotype have no direct relation to the SNPs causning mental traits.

But in case of that you speak of populations that have been isolated from each other for a long time (Subsaharan Africans, East Asians etc.) you will have a (statistically, not causally) strong correlation between the athropological phenotype and mental traits.

How much influence do the genes play in shaping ones character and behavior? And how much influence does the environment have? (nature and nurture). Do you think traumatic experiences of ancestors can be inherited to their descendants?

[Oliver109]

In the UK the people from the north and Scotland often see themselves as more righteous than the southerners, it could be the extra Nordic and Cro magnon blood that causes this thought?

[rothaer]

How much influence do the genes play in shaping ones character and behavior? And how much influence does the environment have? (nature and nurture).

If you put a "born" will-less alcoholic alone on an island without alcohol, he will not be an alcoholic. In this case we would say that the outcome depends 100% on the environment. While when he lives in our environment and is alcoholic we would likely say that it depends on his prediosposition. Both is true. However, this example shows that the popular question how much weight has inheritance and how much weight has the environment for principial reasons can not be generally answered and is thus put wrong.

Do you think traumatic experiences of ancestors can be inherited to their descendants?

A very interesting question. It's about epigenetics, i. e. the methylation of the DNA which is said to have the effect of turning on or off various genes. I hitherto lack knowledge on this topic and I think that much is disputed. I've not yet an opinion and I'm open for whatever finding.