Indicator sentences: I'm not sure I follow how celebrating our differences makes us become less different. Can you elaborate further?
Indicator sentences: Could you be specific on how this does more to separate us? I'm not sure what you mean by your post.
Trigger words: race
Indicator sentences: Ethnic groups aren't pseudo-science, and 'race' is almost exclusively used to refer to ethnic groups in contemporary dialogue, so the point is a little semantically pedantic.
Negotiation parts: wrongly, incorrectly, unscientifically used. You are saying we shouldnt correct the wrongness because everyone is doing it that way, really, thats your response. It has become synonymous with ethnic group, and has been that way for some time now. That is what race means, and it's a very correct usage. Do you use 'awful' to mean good? Do you call poor people 'naughty'? Is a 'cheater' a collections officer of the king? No. Because although those used to be the 'correct' definitions, words mean what they are understood to mean. Language literally isn't prescriptive, and I don't mean that figuratively, although it wouldn't be wrong to use literally that way. [STA-CITE]> It has become synonymous with ethnic group, and has been that way for some time now. [END-CITE][Is-ought problem](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Is%E2%80%93ought_problem) [STA-CITE]>Finally, there is nothing unscientific about ethnicity. [END-CITE]An [ethnic group](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethnic_group) or ethnicity is a socially defined category of people who identify with each other based on common ancestral, social, cultural or national experience.[1][2] Membership of an ethnic group tends to be defined by a shared cultural heritage, ancestry, origin myth, history, homeland, language and/or dialect, symbolic systems such as religion, mythology and ritual, cuisine, dressing style, physical appearance, etc. Sure, nothing unscientific about ethnicity but curious, I dont see the word race in there... [STA-CITE]>these are different races [END-CITE]Social conceptions and groupings of [races](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_(human_classification) vary over time, involving folk taxonomies[7] that define essential types of individuals based on perceived traits. **Scientists consider biological essentialism obsolete, and generally discourage racial explanations for collective differentiation in both physical and behavioral traits.** Trust me or dont trust me that part doesnt matter, I have posted the science look it up yourself. Please stop using race, its wrong, using it only creates more hate and ignorance. Where did I say ought? All I have said is that it is most broadly used, and therefore it is a correct usage. Is-is. That was some shockingly obvious trainspotting, I'll ask that you actually read what I say instead of skimming through it trying, and failing, to find the keywords of logical fallacies. That's what gue is for, not CMV. The only person prescribing language, saying that race ought to not mean what it means, is you. This is my central point. It isn't "unscientific" to use the word 'terrible' to refer to bad things, even though once upon a time it was synonymous to awful, which could mean greatly good. Instead of arguing against prejudice based on ethnicity (which is honourable and I assume your core intention), you're misguidedly arguing against ethnicity even existing, or having non-social components. If ethnicity doesn't exist, or has no non-social components, how can people base prejudice on it! It isn't a biologically classifying or taxonomic concept, but some babies aren't born black just by chance. The rest of your argument skirted around my central point and continued to try and justify denial of the existence of any non-social component of ethnicity so I'll switch to that fully. Show me the "science" (Wikipedia is cute though) which says that genetically differentiated phenotype presentation (not biological essentialism/phrenology/eugenics, although my money is on you not knowing the difference) is imaginary and I'll consider your argument. Until then you're still just making the wrong one. The reason you didn't find a connection between race and ethnicity is because you deliberately avoided it. On the race Wikipedia page (since this is an authority to you): **Starting from the 19th century**, the term was often used in ataxonomic sense to denote **genetically differentiated human populations defined by phenotype.[4][5][6]** This is what people mean when they say race. This is what people understand when they hear race. It's not 1800s Belgium where we invade the Congo and believe eugenicists to help cope with the guilt. It's the 21st century and biological essentialism is done away with. 'Race' still has meaning. Stop trying to change language and fight the actual problem: rac*ism*. There seems to be some confusion. I am telling you race is not a scientific description and its use as a popular culture description causes hate and ignorance. Would you like to agree, perhaps disagree with evidence that it is scientific or take the position of unknown. I don't think you really understand what you're trying to say. Race refers to genetically differentiated human populations defined by phenotype - is there some perceived absence of scientific content here? Genetics is a field of science. Phenotypes are things that exist in nature and can be scientifically examined. Do you know what you mean by "unscientific", or is it just a non-declarative placeholder speech act you use when you have attitudes of aversion? More importantly, even if "race" - whether you mean the word itself or the concept it refers to - *is* in some manner, shape, or form "unscientific" (whatever exactly that's supposed to mean) why is that significant? What generates the "we *ought* to not use the word race", when all you begin with is "the word race/the concept that the word race refers to *is* unscientific"? You're going from the "is" to the "ought" which is obviously quite ironic. Do you hold the position that race is a scientific descriptor? Your answer should be framed as a "yes", "no" or "unknown". Seriously, dont over think this one, just a one word answer. You know what, let me pull it out of this paragraph and restate, again, no tricks, just a simple one word answer is all that required. Also, if you are worried about tricks go ahead and ask any questions you need, look up any references for clarification, just dont let it interfere with your response. Do you hold the position that race is an accepted scientific descriptor? Your answer should be framed as a "yes", "no" or "unknown".
Trigger words: unscientifically scientific (2)
Indicator sentences: Do you know what you mean by "unscientific", or is it just a non-declarative placeholder speech act you use when you have attitudes of aversion?