26
There are no races in the first place.
I mean there are general genetic differences due to where people are from. Is that not what a race is?
The whole race theory has been debunked over a century ago. You also have genetic difference in foot shape, blood type and many more, and a race system build on that would be as wrong as one based on skin colour
Oh I'm not particularly informed on any of this because I don't really care tbh, but I though race was where you (and your ancestors) are from as opposed to skin colour?
Some people use "race" to mean that, but the word you'd be looking for is ethnicity.
You have to ask biology, not politicians. That's the major change!
Biology's answer is simple, and it hasn't changed during the last 50 years or so.
There's genetic differences between you and everyone else in your family. Are you a different race to them?
No, that's why I said general. For example people from Europe tend to have lighter skin, Scandinavian people tend to have lighter hair, African people tend to have coarser hair.
You are just picking an arbitrary set of characteristics and calling it "race". Nature has no concept of race because we are all genetically different and there is no line that one crosses from being one race to another. Race is purely a human construct, and a very unhelpful one, as it is just another way to divide us.
The only reason I refer to it that way is because it is easily understood and is how a lot of paperwork refers to it. In my opinion, it makes it sound like we we are a completely different alien species.
Life is not a race
I don't think 300 years would be enough to completely homogenize all races even if done intentionally.
Even so given the appropriate amount of time, where do you think we might end up?
Measured at what age? You definitely don't have the same skin now as newborn you. Skincolor is dependend as much on nutritional and eviromental factors as it is on genetic ones. In addition to that the genes don't simply average out your skin tones. There are enough examples of "interracial" couples having 2 children, one being dark skinned and the other being pale. Your base melanin levels and additional melanin production are two entirely different and independend genetic factors.
Fair enough, measured at 25 and with a healthy nutrition and they do see the sun regularly. That answers the skin tone, but what about facial features? When it is all said and done, what features might take over? Like eye, nose, and mouth shape.
would would?
wood? bread?
charcoal?
Well you do raise a very good point. But what about wood would wheat ash?
Needs charcoal oil.
Of course, how could I not think of that?
National Geographic (I think — it may have been Smithsonian or Scientific American or…) projected this back in the late 80s. The genetic “average” that they generated was beautiful.
Out of curiosity, I looked up “race” by anthropological terms in the dictionary and discovered that “race” is…
- No longer in technical use.
- Described as an arbitrary classification.
- A socially constructed category.
“Ethnicities” might have been a more suitable word choice for your intended query.
Corrected to ethnicities. However it still is used in words like interracial. So it isn't completely out of our lexicon.
Oh I didn’t meant to imply it has left our lexicon. I was just curious about it since so many people had things to say, and looked it up. You bring up a really fascinating point about “interracial”, though. If there’s a more appropriate alternative to that word, I’d like to know it.
Probably a mixture of Arabic and Asian features.
I was betting a lightish brown skin tone with Asian feature set. However, I believe you might be closer to what it might be.
I think having a 300 year life span would tend to select for darker skin and possibly other traits that would better survive 300 years of exposure - enough to distinguish it from any existing ethnicity.
Idk, but I'm sure that in at least 200 years genetical modifications will be accessible if everything goes fine.
Probably it will apply to skin tone and facial features and there could be a strange variety of new colors or
most people would pick whatever is considered 'the best looking' features in 300 years.
tbh the idea of having the choice of changing genetics sounds good, but it's impossible to know what will
happen in 300 years.
At least that is what I think possible in the next 300 years.
If we can look like shrek, a not insignificant portion of the population would do so. I mean, who wouldn't want to look like the ideal body type?
Shrek is love, Shrek is life, Shrek is high fashion.
this post was submitted on 11 Aug 2023
26 points (86.1% liked)
No Stupid Questions
34432 readers
1593 users here now
No such thing. Ask away!
!nostupidquestions is a community dedicated to being helpful and answering each others' questions on various topics.
The rules for posting and commenting, besides the rules defined here for lemmy.world, are as follows:
Rules (interactive)
Rule 1- All posts must be legitimate questions. All post titles must include a question.
All posts must be legitimate questions, and all post titles must include a question. Questions that are joke or trolling questions, memes, song lyrics as title, etc. are not allowed here. See Rule 6 for all exceptions.
Rule 2- Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material.
Your question subject cannot be illegal or NSFW material. You will be warned first, banned second.
Rule 3- Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here.
Do not seek mental, medical and professional help here. Breaking this rule will not get you or your post removed, but it will put you at risk, and possibly in danger.
Rule 4- No self promotion or upvote-farming of any kind.
That's it.
Rule 5- No baiting or sealioning or promoting an agenda.
Questions which, instead of being of an innocuous nature, are specifically intended (based on reports and in the opinion of our crack moderation team) to bait users into ideological wars on charged political topics will be removed and the authors warned - or banned - depending on severity.
Rule 6- Regarding META posts and joke questions.
Provided it is about the community itself, you may post non-question posts using the [META] tag on your post title.
On fridays, you are allowed to post meme and troll questions, on the condition that it's in text format only, and conforms with our other rules. These posts MUST include the [NSQ Friday] tag in their title.
If you post a serious question on friday and are looking only for legitimate answers, then please include the [Serious] tag on your post. Irrelevant replies will then be removed by moderators.
Rule 7- You can't intentionally annoy, mock, or harass other members.
If you intentionally annoy, mock, harass, or discriminate against any individual member, you will be removed.
Likewise, if you are a member, sympathiser or a resemblant of a movement that is known to largely hate, mock, discriminate against, and/or want to take lives of a group of people, and you were provably vocal about your hate, then you will be banned on sight.
Rule 8- All comments should try to stay relevant to their parent content.
Rule 9- Reposts from other platforms are not allowed.
Let everyone have their own content.
Rule 10- Majority of bots aren't allowed to participate here.
Credits
Our breathtaking icon was bestowed upon us by @Cevilia!
The greatest banner of all time: by @TheOneWithTheHair!
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS