Some people might have problems understanding the distinctions that I made in the previous entry on racism. This is partly because many assume that "racism" in any sense is false and immoral no matter what, and so they cannot see how racism in the first sense would not always be racism in the second sense also, even on a definitional level. They are blind to any logical analysis of the subject, and so they might have greater difficulty understanding what I was saying.

So far I have not received any negative response on the previous entry, but I am guessing that since some people are accustomed to thinking in a particular way, they might misunderstand what I was getting at yesterday, so that it might be worthwhile to clarify. Those who understood what I was saying realized that I was not undermining racial equality or justifying racism, but I was complaining against a bad argument.

But perhaps some failed to see the point. So I have decided to illustrate and restate some things, and actually naming a race of people in the process. Since racial discussions are more heated when whites and blacks are involved, so that some people would refuse to calmly listen, and since I am Chinese myself, I will use the Chinese people as the focus of my illustrations.

First, we will remind ourselves of the definitions suggested in Merriam-Webster, on the basis of which we made the distinctions: (1) "a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race," and (2) "racial prejudice or discrimination."

For the sake of the illustration, suppose it is true that all or most Chinese people are born with greater intelligence than people of other races. Then if intelligence is a standard by which we define or measure superiority and inferiority, the Chinese people would be superior by birth. To assert this fact, then, would be "racist" according to the first definition in Merriam-Webster, even though it would be a factually true statement. However, by itself it cannot be racist in the second sense, which is the usual sense attacked in most discussions on racism.

Or, suppose it is true that all or most Chinese people are born with weaker livers than people of other races. Then if liver health or health in general is a standard by which we define or measure superiority and inferiority, the Chinese people would be inferior by birth. Again, to merely affirm this fact would be "racist" according to the first definition in Merriam-Webster, even though it would be a factually true statement. But again, by itself it cannot be racist in the second sense.

One problem with the non-Christians who argue against racism is that they oppose racism in the second sense because they think that no racist statement in the first sense could ever be true. They admit that there are some inherited differences among the races, such as skin color, but that these differences are non-essential. For their argument to stand, they must first discover these differences, then specify and defend a standard by which to judge whether these differences are essential or non-essential in determining superiority and inferiority, define and justify their definitions of superiority and inferiority, and then apply the standard to the differences between the races to demonstrate that there are no essential differences indicating that one race is inherently superior or inferior to another.

If they skip or fail any of these steps, then the process of reasoning is invalid, and the whole case falls apart.¹ They will have no rational basis by which to assert that no racist statement in the first sense could ever be true. In fact, because their method is science, which I have repeatedly shown to be always fallacious and irrational, no one can ever demonstrate on the basis of empirical and scientific investigations that all racist statements in the first sense must be false. It is simply impossible. Moreover, since empiricism and science can never establish any moral principle, neither can they oppose racism in the second sense. This is why science can say nothing about racism, whether for or against it.

Only biblical revelation can provide the correct basis from which to understand racial issues, and if racism is indeed immoral, to oppose it.

First, we must come to terms with the fact that not all statements that can be described as "racist" in some sense are false or immoral (see Titus 1:12). Not all statements about racial distinctions indicate a "racist" attitude. Many Chinese people are good at math. Many Chinese people are short. Most Chinese supermarkets are filthy.² So what? These are descriptive statements that might be true or false, but they are not racist in an immoral sense. If they are true, then they are not inherently problematic, but only when they are asserted or applied with a racist attitude, that is, racist in the second sense. But if they are false, then they should be rejected because they are false whether or not they are asserted or applied with a racist attitude. If we will acknowledge these straightforward distinctions, discussions on race and racism would become more precise and productive.

Then, we must not go to Scripture already obsessed with the agenda to find arguments against racism, before we even discover what it teaches about the subject of man and of race. Instead, we must first gain an understanding of creation, humanity, and redemptive history. We will find that all men were made in the image of God (Genesis 1:27), that all were made from "one blood" (Acts 17:26, KJV), and that although God has made a distinction between the elect and the non-elect, the Christians and the non-Christians, both groups consist of people from various races. God does not damn people only from a particular race, but he sends all kinds of people to hell according to his justice and pleasure. Likewise, he saves people from all difference races, and the believers from one race are not inherently more spiritual or privileged than the believers from another race (Romans 10:12; Galatians 3:28).

Third, we must oppose racism not because we wish to be politically correct or because of any man-centered motive, but because God has told us to love our neighbors as ourselves, a command that all true believers are eager to obey.

Finally, when a true negative statement is made about your race, instead of complaining of racism, you should just fix the problem. If the statement is true, then racism is not the problem, your people are the problem. If derogatory remarks about your race bother you so much, then take responsibility for your people. Help to improve the people of your race in those areas where others make true criticisms. Quit taking the wimp's way out in blaming those who expose your flaws. It will only make your race appear even more pathetic, and it will only increase other people's contempt for your people.³ Paul wrote, "Even one of their own prophets has said, ‘Cretans are always liars, evil brutes, lazy gluttons.’ This testimony is true. Therefore, rebuke them sharply, so that they will be sound in the faith" (Titus 1:12–13).⁴ He was telling Titus to do the Cretans a big favor, that is, to save them from themselves by the power of the gospel.

Notes

¹ For example, how do they establish whether or not Chinese are born more intelligent than others? And how do they establish whether this is an essential characteristic in determining superiority and inferiority?

² I could offer more extreme statements than these and the ones given earlier (on intelligence and health), and these more provoking examples might in fact better illustrate my point. However, there is no need to be crude or offensive if the reader can grasp at least the general direction of my thinking even with these milder ones.

³ Remember I am saying this as a Chinese who has been on the receiving end of some negative racial remarks and discrimination (although admittedly much less than many others). I am referring to racist statements and actions in the second and immoral sense. Yet, I have no problem admitting that some negative generalizations about Chinese people are true, and that in these cases, the Chinese should change instead of complaining of racism. Now, it would be wrong to think that one who has never experienced racial discrimination has no right to say what I am saying here, but I mention this for the sake of those who are irrational enough to think that only experience gives one the right to address the issue.

⁴ We might wonder if this verse is the best illustration for our point, since "Cretans" are not on the same level as "Greeks," but on the same level as something like "Corinthians." But the principle is similar enough, only that the statement is more narrow. Not all Asians are Chinese — there are Japanese, Koreans, etc. — but a statement about the Chinese would be considered a racial statement, only that it would be more specific than a statement about Asians in general. There are other relevant verses in Scripture that employ broader racial terms, such as "Jews" and "Greeks." This verse is chosen because it illustrates several of our points at the same time. It is indeed a negative racial statement, but the passage also tells us what to do with it.

 

Posted in Philosophy, Apologetics, Spirituality, Current | Permanent Link