exaclty this

there are no counterarguments

if this breaks it all...

its a confusion in terms

that's literally it

There are no valid counter arguments.

we just need to create the most straight forward and simple arguments anyone can understand. I think mine are pretty good already, but..

But once you start with the definition, you are asking for a stale mate

only one of the problems with all of this is that were not allowed to do any science surronding it at all

I don't see how tbh

I think once you explain it's not a magic term, they start to get it

like they have this blind spot

Like Banjod just said, we need simple arguments anyone can understand.

abandoning the term race is too much - you can do it tactically, but to abandon it wholesale is utterly ridiculous

Believe me, you can't defeat the race definition. But good luck convincing someone of race from that start.

no, the term race is PERFECT for us

what do you mean you can't defeat the race definition?

It is solid.

It is scientific.

whose, ours or theirs?

HBD science is happening and going on

Ours

what are you talking about?

Ok, let me start from Square one.

ok...

So, I have been debating people on race for a few months.

There are two positions that you can use to argue race.

nerthulas IT IS PAST

UR

BEDTIME

😭

<:Gun:639978512207314973>

sleep

<:sleeb:640412152867323904>

nerthugroyper

Definition ---> Premises and evolution or Premises and evolution ---> definition

i think there are more than 2 positions to have

i tuck you in @Nerthulas

<:comfy:639985510785351680>

Premises and evolution ---> definition
I find this approach to be the more convincing and novel.

You work to the definition, instead of working from it.