Cross Breeds

If different breeds of dogs are considered superior or inferior to each other then why can't different races?

If different breeds of dogs are considered superior or inferior to each other then why can't different human races be classified as superior and inferior too(cause there is about as much difference between human races as between breeds of dogs)? Compare the sizes of a german and a japanese, and you'll instantly see the folly of your argument.

Public Comments

1. Because there is far less variation among human races than there is between dog breeds. Compare the sizes of a chihuahua and a doberman, and you'll instantly see the folly of your argument. EDIT: The average chihuahua is about 5 pounds. The average doberman is closer to 60. That's a 1200% difference. The average japanese man is 5'6, 145 pounds. The average german man is 5'9", 180 pounds. That's a 20% difference in weight and a 4% difference in height.
2. Different races may have different characteristics (on average) but all humans have the same inherent value. This is true of dogs also. Except that dogs are property and therefore have monetary value to the owner. Monetary value may be related to the breed, the training, fertility, or other factors. Humans are not given monetary value because they are not property. Therefore a crippled, mentally retarded person has the same inherent value as a rocket scientist or a basketball star.
3. Apparently you have not been to Germany or Japan.
4. There have been many attempts to classify humans into inferior/superior categories. The eugenics fad started by Francis Galton in the late 1800's is probably the most famous of these attempts. According to eugenicists, superior humans were wealthy, white, educated, christian and well-mannered (according to the etiquette of the day), inferior humans included everyone else. If you were poor...inferior. If any member of your family had been in prison...inferior. If you were male and hadn't attended college...inferior. They considered these traits hereditary. They used broad categories to classify people "scientifically". The Eugenics Record Office was founded as a repository of the information that eugenicists had gathered in the field. Eventually, the movement was recognized as bunk, because the methods they established as "scientific" were shown to be subjective, ineffective and academically indefensible. Really, if you wanted to quantify superior/inferior traits, you would have to determine your own definition of what is superior/inferior. Then have a means of measuring those traits. Of course, you'd also have to define each "race" that you are comparing. Are Algerians the same race as the Zulu? They don't look the same but they both come from Africa. And unfortunately, in some areas, the traits we might consider distinct in one area blend from one geographic area to another. So the almond shaped eyes of the Chinese on the east coast of China eventually become rounder and rounder as you move toward western Russia. There are Kyrgyzstani who look somewhat Asian, but they also look Caucasian. Where is the line drawn that separates one race from another? Genetically, race has no meaning. All fertile members of the human species can interbreed. So if you are "considering" which races are inferior/superior to another, I don't think you'll have much luck from a scientific perspective.