[homogeneous]

> I think it's clear from your first comment which of us feels superior. Smugness seems to pass as argument in this debate.

Not sure what you're referring to here but I did not use the word superior or make any references to superiority in any of my replies, but I think it's ironic that you accuse me of using smugness as an argument when you only responded to the first sentence of my reply (to tell me I'm smug) instead of the paragraph describing the argument.

> I was clearly distinguishing between those who hold that position because they think there are no significant differences and those who would maintain that position if uncomfortable differences were discovered.

What I'm telling you is that "those who hold that position because they think there are no significant differences" is a strawman. Once again, everyone except self-identified racists (they do exist) claim that all people should be treated equally and it is fallacious for you to claim a monopoly on this position because you believe it to be an inevitable truth that some races are genetically predisposed to stupidity.

[dionidium]

Apologies. There's another commenter in this thread focused on superiority and I think I confused you two.

I would like to highlight how this argument engenders emotional hyperbole, though. My position is that there are likely uncomfortable genetic differences to be revealed ahead. You characterize this view as the "inevitable truth that some races are genetically predisposed to stupidity."

I'll just have to leave it to others to decide if I said anything at all like that.

[homogeneous]

I hope I have not misinterpreted your position.

> We're almost certainly going to discover less palatable differences between races -- e.g. around intelligence.

I read that as "we are almost certainly going to discover, for example, that some races are more intelligent than other races". From this statement it follows that we will be able to prove that some races are "more intelligent" and some races are "less intelligent", thus it seems fair to conclude that you're asserting that the genetic factors that cause someone to fall into a specific racial category predisposes them to a certain level of intelligence. From that position we can conclude that if an individual displays the phenotypic traits that meet the definition of one of the less intelligent races, it follows that this individual would be genetically predisposed to less intelligence, also known as stupidity.

I do notice that you said "almost certainly", not "inevitably" so I apologize for that, but please let me know if I have otherwise misinterpreted your position.