The reaction to African-American faces was found to be weaker in people with racially diverse peers.
There's never been good reason to believe that human beings are naturally racist. After all, in the environment of human evolution--which didn't feature, for example, jet travel to other continents--there would have been virtually no encounters between groups that had different skin colors or other conspicuous physical differences. So it's not as if the human lineage could have plausibly developed, by evolutionary adaptation, an instinctive reaction to members of different races.
Nonetheless, people who want to argue that racism_is_natural have tried to buttress their position with evidence that racism is in some sense biological. For example: studies have found that when whites see black faces there is increased activity in the amygdala, a brain structure associated with emotion and, specifically, with the detection of threats.
Well, whatever power that kind of argument ever had--which wasn't much, since the fact that a psychological reaction has a biological correlate doesn't tell you whether the reaction is innate--it has even less power now. In a_paper_that will be published in the_Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, Eva Telzer of UCLA and three other researchers report that they've performed these amygdala studies--which had previously been done on adults--on children. And they found something interesting: the racial sensitivity of the amygdala doesn't kick in until around age 14.
What's more: once it kicks in, it doesn't kick in equally for everybody. The more racially diverse your peer group, the less strong the amygdala effect. At really high levels of diversity, the effect disappeared entirely. The authors of the study write that ''these findings suggest that neural biases to race are not innate and that race is a social construction, learned over time.''
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
To sum this up, if you grew up around people different than yourself, you're less likely to have a negative view of people who are physically different than yourself?
Boiled down, it's a simple concept. No relevant university degrees required. Pretty sure a child could comprehend it
__________________
Your Lord knows very well what is in your heart. Your soul suffices this day as a reckoner against you. I need no witnesses. You do not listen to your soul, but listen instead to your anger and your rage.
What a terrible post and a terrible logic. Are you trolling? I can't tell.
We already admitetd that social conditoning can diminish innate traits, so saying that a specific social conditioning would make racism "not genetic" is nonsense. On the contrary, your argument should be that in the most borderline society with a similar looking individuals will show no response of fear over different fenotypes.
Why are you trying this hard to disprove the point Whirly was trying to make!?
1) Where is your evidence of this? What do you define as "highest level of diversity"?
2) How does the former lead to the latter? Are you saying Racism is ONLY a social construct or is influenced by learned behaviours? These two are very different things.
You played fast and loose with your words there. Not detracting from you. I am genuinely curious and want to learn.
Basicallly as I am sure you know the amygdala and the neo cortex work together, the cortex using cognition to filter thr amygdala through cognition. In fear response the amygdala plays a central role. Researchers are beginning to show that the amygdala, rather than responding exclusively to negative or fear-inducing stimuli to trigger a fight-or-flight response, seems to be exquisitely sensitive to affectively important information in the environment. This is a subtle but important difference and suggests that the amygdala’s response may depend on the task or the situation at hand. Therefore child studies of race mean nothing because the amygdala has not responded to the environment and social settings around it in relation to race and accordingbto the study at the top of the page and others. Implicit bias cannot have been constructed by the society the child is in. Be it multi-cultural white or black. Implicit bias becomes a more solid fear response at around 14, the neo cortex then needs to process the responses and this happens meaning in most intelligent people they will moderate any fear of the different. It is only in echo chambers where people propagate these ideas it becomes a real problem.
Huh? It was a question asking if I understood the post and points correctly, not disproving or proving. Maybe re-read what I said after taking a brief nap?
Oh, my bad then. I read too much into it. My gut instinct was that is was humor with the "terrible logic" comment mimicking another poster, so should have gone with my gut. Egg on my face, man.
KMC Community Forums
Apr 1st, 2019 02:54 PM
