Race: Biological nonproblem, cultural quagmire (original) (raw)
Related papers
Race: Scientific nonproblem, cultural quagmire
The Anatomical Record Part B the New Anatomist, 2004
The matter of biological differentiation among human beings has been a perennial concern of physical anthropologists, whose profession grew out of the monogenist/polygenist debates of the 18th century, and who periodically feel impelled to issue sonorous pronouncements on the subject. In spite of (or perhaps because of) the extensive and difficult cultural ramifications of the race issue, such pronouncements have usually presented the matter of race as one that requires extensive bioanthropological exegesis. In reality, however, race is the most banal of biological issues. Within any species, including Homo sapiens, two biological processes are possible: physical differentiation (as routinely occurs in small population isolates) and reintegration (should the resulting differentiated populations come together in the absence of any barrier to mating). The history of Homo sapiens reflects both of these processes: initial differentiation among small, scattered populations in the later part of the Pleistocene, and subsequent reintegration as the human population expanded and these populations came together once more. It is for this reason that, while certain modal physical types can be recognized on any urban street today (differentiation), it is impossible to recognize any clear boundaries between them (reintegration). All of this is perfectly unremarkable in evolutionary terms, and requires no special explanation. The complexities of the race issue are real, of course, and it is important that we come to terms with them; but they will not be resolved by biologists.
Human Races: A Genetic and Evolutionary Perspective
American Anthropologist, 1998
Race is generally used as a synonym for subspecies, which traditionally is a geographically circumscribed, genetically differentiated population. Sometimes traits show independent patterns of geographical variation such that some combination will distinguish most populations from all others. To avoid making "race" the equivalent of a local population, minimal thresholds of differentiation are imposed. Human "races" are below the thresholds used in other species, so valid traditional subspecies do not exist in humans. A "subspecies" can also be defined as a distinct evolutionary lineage within a species. Genetic surveys and the analyses of DN A haplotype trees show that human "races" are not distinct lineages, and that this is not due to recent admixture; human "races" are not and never were "pure." Instead, human evolution has been and is characterized by many locally differentiated populations coexisting at any given time, but with sufficient genetic contact to make all of humanity a single lineage sharing a common evolutionary fate, [race, subspecies, lineage, haplotype tree, genetic differentiation}
Races may exist in humans in a cultural sense, but biological concepts of race are needed to access their reality in a non-species-specific manner and to see if cultural categories correspond to biological categories within humans. Modern biological concepts of race can be implemented objectively with molecular genetic data through hypothesis-testing. Genetic data sets are used to see if biological races exist in humans and in our closest evolutionary relative, the chimpanzee. Using the two most commonly used biological concepts of race, chimpanzees are indeed subdivided into races but humans are not. Adaptive traits, such as skin color, have frequently been used to define races in humans, but such adaptive traits reflect the underlying environmental factor to which they are adaptive and not overall genetic differentiation , and different adaptive traits define discordant groups. There are no objective criteria for choosing one adaptive trait over another to define race. As a consequence, adaptive traits do not define races in humans. Much of the recent scientific literature on human evolution portrays human populations as separate branches on an evolutionary tree. A tree-like structure among humans has been falsified whenever tested, so this practice is scientifically indefensible. It is also socially irresponsible as these pictorial representations of human evolution have more impact on the general public than nuanced phrases in the text of a scientific paper. Humans have much genetic diversity, but the vast majority of this diversity reflects individual uniqueness and not race.
EVOLUTION AND NOTIONS OF HUMAN RACE
How Evolution Shapes Our Lives: Essays on Biology and Society, 2016
The biological meaning of race 2. Do biological races exist in chimpanzees? 3. Do biological races exist in humans? 4. Do adaptive traits define human races? 5. Do human races exist: The answer Races exist in humans in a cultural sense, but it is essential to use biological concepts of race that are applied to other species to see whether human races exist in a manner that avoids cultural biases and anthropocentric thinking. Modern concepts of race can be implemented objectively with molecular genetic data, and genetic data sets are used to see whether biological races exist in humans and in our closest evolutionary relative, the chimpanzee. GLOSSARY Admixture. Reproduction between members of two populations that previously had little to no reproductive contact. Alleles. Alternative forms of homologous genes within a species that constitute the most basic type of genetic diversity. Evolutionary lineage. A population that maintains genetic continuity and identity over many generations because of little to no reproductive interchange with other populations. Evolutionary Tree. A depiction of the ancestral relationships that interconnect a group of biological entities through a diagram in which ances-Evolution and Notions of Race • 347 tral nodes can split into two or more descendant types but that does not allow fusion of previously split types. Gene Flow.Movement of individuals or gametes from the local population of birth to a different local population followed by successful reproduction. Genetil Differentiation.Differences among populations based on particular alleles they possess, the frequencies of shared alleles, or both. Haplotype.A specific nucleotide sequence existing among the homologous copies of a defined DNA region, whether a gene or not. Isolationby Distonle. A model of gene flow in which most genetic interchange is between neighboring populations but in which genes can spread to distant populations over many generations because there are no absolute barriers to movement between neighboring populations. leeel Population. A collection of interbreeding individuals of the same species that live in sufficient proximity that most mates are drawn from this collection of individuals. ROle.A subpopulation within a species, also called a subspecies, that has sharp geographic boundaries separating it from the remainder of the species, with the boundaries characterized by a high degree of genetic differentiation defined either through a quantitative threshold or qualitatively as a separate evolutionary lineage. 348 • Chapter 22 Time Gene flow with isolation by distance and some long-distance dispersal 0.13 Ma 0.65 Ma 1.90 Ma Evolution and Notions of Race
Another Look at Ethnicity as a Biological Concept
Critique of anthropology, 2007
■ Montagu referred to race as 'man's most dangerous myth', while Lévi-Strauss called it 'the original sin of anthropology'. Although persuasive arguments against the concept of race were made throughout the 20th century, race remains a particular problem for anthropologists who deal in the classification of human populations. Racial terminology has been perpetuated within anthropology largely owing to the fact that, historically, race formed the very core of anthropological study. Despite the conceptual inadequacy of race, the anthropological enterprise has yet to move beyond it as an explanatory tool for understanding human biological variation because of the lack of a conceptual and/or methodological replacement. This article re-analyses historical anthropological literature on ethnicity and biocultural interaction as a replacement for the race concept, and recasts it in the context of modern philosophical and psychological perspectives on population variation.
The Status of the Race Concept in Physical Anthropology
American Anthropologist, 1998
There are hereditary differences among human beings. Some of these differences have geographical correlates. Some genetic variants that produce physical or behavioral deficits occur significantly more often in some areas, or in some ethnic groups, than in others. However, none of these facts provides any intellectual support for the race concept, for racial classifications, or for social hierarchies based on ethnic-group membership. The geographical element of the race concept is important in theory but is widely ignored in practice since it does not conform well to the facts of current human phenotype distribution. Much of the literature on supposed racial differences involves such geographically meaningless exercises as studying differences among "races" by subdividing a sample of North Americans. If races are defined as geographically delimited conspecific populations characterized by distinctive regional phenotypes, then human races do not exist now and have not existed for centuries, [race, human variation, intelligence]
GENETICS AND THE ORIGINS OF RACE
Attempts to establish a biological basis for classifying human races into definable groups, arranged hierarchically from most advanced to least advanced, have a long and sordid history. From the days of the Spanish Inquisition, to the colonization of North and South America, the beginnings of the slave trade, to more recent claims about inborn racial differences in intelligence and personality, racists have tried to find biological differences that would separate the various races and provide a justification for social and economic exploitation. Biologically, races have been equated with subspecies as defined in the general biological literature. But the evidence from modern, molecular genetics, indicates that humans do not form the same kinds of distinguishable subgroups common to other animal, especially mammalian, species. Biologically, human populations are 99% similar genetically, and the various visible characteristics that have traditionally been used to distinguish one "race" from another, do not correlate with any other characters of importance. Humans have evolved as a single lineage with many local populations that have always been in reproductive contact with each other. Thus, human sub-populations have not diverged to the extent that is found in other species, such as chimpanzees.
Racial classification in the evolutionary sciences: a comparative analysis.
History and philosophy of the life sciences, 2007
Human racial classification has long been a problem for the discipline of anthropology, but much of the criticism of the race concept has focused on its social and political connotations. The central argument of this paper is that race is not a specifically human problem, but one that exists in evolutionary thought in general. This paper looks at various disciplinary approaches to racial or subspecies classification, extending its focus beyond the anthropological race concept by providing a comparative analysis of the use of racial classification in evolutionary biology, genetics, and anthropology.