Another Race Question

[Taraz]

For those of you who think that race isn't socially constructed and that it is easy to classify people into these categories . . . Please list all the physical characteristics required to be considered a) black b) white c) latino d) east asian.

[madnak]

a) "you know what they say about black guys" b) can't jump c) kleptomania d) squinty eyes

[Mr_J]

[ QUOTE ]
The validity of human races is a subject of much debate. The American Anthropological Association, drawing on biological research, states that "The concept of race is a social and cultural construction. . . . Race simply cannot be tested or proven scientifically," and that, "It is clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. The concept of 'race' has no validity . . . in the human species."

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
85 percent of human variation occurs within populations, and not between populations

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
This distribution of skin color and its geographic patterning—with people whose ancestors lived predominantly near the equator having darker skin than those with ancestors who lived predominantly in higher latitudes—indicate that this attribute has been under strong selective pressure. Darker skin appears to be strongly selected for in equatorial regions to prevent sunburn, skin cancer, the photolysis of folate, and damage to sweat glands

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
many parts of the United States, categories such as Hispanic or Latino are viewed to constitute a race, though others see Hispanic as a linguistic and cultural grouping coming from a variety of backgrounds. In Europe, such a distinction, suggesting that South Europeans are not European or white, would seem odd at least or possibly even insulting.

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
The problem arises of distinguishing black Africans as a racial group; it doesn't work because it is a paraphyletic classification. In other words, under a phylogenetic classification, considering black Africans as a single racial group would require one to include every living person on Earth within that single African "race", because the genetic variation of the rest of the world represents essentially a single subtree within that of Africa

[/ QUOTE ]

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
For those of you who think that race isn't socially constructed and that it is easy to classify people into these categories . . . Please list all the physical characteristics required to be considered a) black b) white c) latino d) east asian.

[/ QUOTE ]
Is this a problem to the argument if you just include a category "mixed"? It seems to me that, although it is hard to provide the list you are talking about, there are people who are indisputably black, latino, east asian, whatever category you choose to name. Given it is indisputable doesnt it suggest there is something objective about it?
(For example - Nancy Reagan is white - is anyone going to disagree with this characterization?)

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
(For example - Nancy Reagan is white - is anyone going to disagree with this characterization?)


[/ QUOTE ]

I would. The only way to be sure would be the have her genealogical tree. I could presume that at least in part she would have europeans antecedents. I that is so, then I think that 95% or more of the european population has semite blood somewhere along the line. Again, it is the concept of race that is not valid, not what she looks like.

[Taraz]

First of all, I agree with everything Mr J quoted.

Bunny, I am not saying that you can't look at some people and say, "oh he is clearly [insert race here]." After reading some responses in the other thread, some were claiming that "black" people are genetically inferior intellectually than other groups. This assumes that we can separate people into black, white, asian, etc and if we measure the intelligence of each group there will be differences based solely upon which category they are from. If it is in fact genetic, perhaps they would like to explain how we parse out who belongs to which race.

[MathEconomist]

[ QUOTE ]
Given it is indisputable doesnt it suggest there is something objective about it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. I can look at how someone dresses and describe them as "frat boy", "goth", "sorority girl" or whatever and in some cases it would be indisputable, but that doesn't mean the concept is anything more than a social construct. We might all agree that Dave Chappelle is black, but if there's no way to pin down exactly what genetic or physical traits make him black then the concept isn't really meaningful other than as a social construct.

I'm fairly sure that "black" actually encompasses a lot of distinct ethnic groups with quite different physical characteristics, and the same is true of "white".

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(For example - Nancy Reagan is white - is anyone going to disagree with this characterization?)


[/ QUOTE ]

I would. The only way to be sure would be the have her genealogical tree. I could presume that at least in part she would have europeans antecedents. I that is so, then I think that 95% or more of the european population has semite blood somewhere along the line. Again, it is the concept of race that is not valid, not what she looks like.

[/ QUOTE ]
First let me point out that I'm just speculating, I've never really thought about it before (and certainly never read anything). Would you really dispute her being white though? Or just say it's impossible to be sure? If you are disputing based on going back down her family tree, then it seems like everyone is the same race - whatever race mitochondrial eve was (cue Sharkey's entrance /images/graemlins/tongue.gif). I'll have to think more about it.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Given it is indisputable doesnt it suggest there is something objective about it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Not really. I can look at how someone dresses and describe them as "frat boy", "goth", "sorority girl" or whatever and in some cases it would be indisputable, but that doesn't mean the concept is anything more than a social construct. We might all agree that Dave Chappelle is black, but if there's no way to pin down exactly what genetic or physical traits make him black then the concept isn't really meaningful other than as a social construct.

[/ QUOTE ]
You have convinced me.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
First of all, I agree with everything Mr J quoted.

Bunny, I am not saying that you can't look at some people and say, "oh he is clearly [insert race here]." After reading some responses in the other thread, some were claiming that "black" people are genetically inferior intellectually than other groups. This assumes that we can separate people into black, white, asian, etc and if we measure the intelligence of each group there will be differences based solely upon which category they are from. If it is in fact genetic, perhaps they would like to explain how we parse out who belongs to which race.

[/ QUOTE ]
I would be against this of course - one of my favorite books is the mismeasure of man by Stephen J Gould. He challenges the ability to even measure intelligence in the first place. I was merely speculating on whether the inability to enunciate clear criteria actually implies that there is no objective measure.

[purnell]

[ QUOTE ]
First let me point out that I'm just speculating, I've never really thought about it before (and certainly never read anything). Would you really dispute her being white though?

[/ QUOTE ]

The point is that what we call "white" and "black" and "asian", etc, are merely superficial and arbitrary distinctions. What is generally called "race" has no meaning in a scientific context. That's why race is a social construct, instead of an objectively observable fact.

[bunny]

[ QUOTE ]
The point is that what we call "white" and "black" and "asian", etc, are merely superficial and arbitrary distinctions. What is generally called "race" has no meaning in a scientific context. That's why race is a social construct, instead of an objectively observable fact.

[/ QUOTE ]
I am struggling to understand why it cant be both (struggling, not being obtuse /images/graemlins/tongue.gif).

[purnell]

That's the best I can do at the moment. We need a biologist here. Rduke?

[Taraz]

[ QUOTE ]

I am struggling to understand why it cant be both (struggling, not being obtuse /images/graemlins/tongue.gif).

[/ QUOTE ]

It could be both if there were any real determining factors that made someone white or black or whatever. It can't be both because there is no way to measure blackness or whiteness. That is what I was trying to get at in this post. You can't set out physical criteria that dilineate what it means to belong to a specific race.

[Mr_J]

Go to wikipedia and search for race. It has a decent read about it all, describing the problems with 'race'.

[Rduke55]

Yeah, the problems with race as a scientific concept are 1) that race is a continuum, 2) the variability within ethnic groups within a race are enormous and 3) (kind of related to #2 - hell, all three are kind of the same point) the similarities between the "races" are substantial.

Another thing people are having difficulty on in these threads is they seem to be ignoring the phrase purnell and others are using: "as a scientific concept"
Remember we're talking on the genetic level here. Allele frequencies and such. Not what neighborhood you live in, not what music you listen to, not what kind of food your momma made for you when you were a child, not what you checked on your college applications.

People also seem to be misunderstanding the difference between race and other groupings in the light some of the other medical information they have. Is information on family and ethnic lineage useful? Sure. It's useful to know that Ashkenazi jews have a high incidence of Tay-Sachs? It's useful to know that people from this family or small community from the mountains of East Bumfuckistan have an unusual variant of protein X and therefore drug Dumpisol has potential life-threatening side effects.
Unfortunately, it's an easy mental jump to erroneously extrapolate these findings to race as a whole.

[Taraz]

Why hasn't anybody who disagrees with me responded yet? /images/graemlins/frown.gif

I wanted to argue a little bit . . .

[12AX7]

Well, as far as what's been published, there seems to be no race gene. And like most human traits, it appears to be on a continuum.

Take for example "insanity". In it's extreme cases, it's unmistakable. But where is the line between "insane" and merely "eccentric". This is something the law has debated in much detail. Actually much legal thinking is about how to split such hairs.

So taking that as a model, "Extreme White", "Extreme Yellow", "Extreme Black", "Extreme Red" are fairly easy to characterize. However, what of a mullato, octaroon, quadroon, etc.?

So, even though race may be a social construction, what difference does it make if that construction is a good predictor?

Can anyone doubt the crime rate, out of wedlock birth rates, and AIDS rates are higher among people subjectively identified as black? (Fill in your own examples for other races here.)

However, one thing none of us here likely know is, "What scientifically valid indicators have been withheld to prevent widespread race based actions like the Nazis attempted?"

In other words, who here really knows anything but what they've been *told* in the media?

[Rduke55]

[ QUOTE ]
So, even though race may be a social construction, what difference does it make if that construction is a good predictor?

Can anyone doubt the crime rate, out of wedlock birth rates, and AIDS rates are higher among people subjectively identified as black? (Fill in your own examples for other races here.)

[/ QUOTE ]

But we're not talking about that. We're talking about intrinsic traits. Your example has a lot of other variables that influence it (socioeconomics is the monstous one that comes to mind)

[ QUOTE ]
However, one thing none of us here likely know is, "What scientifically valid indicators have been withheld to prevent widespread race based actions like the Nazis attempted?"

In other words, who here really knows anything but what they've been *told* in the media?


[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I'd say I know. And anyone else with training and access to journals. We don't all get our science form watching a couple minutes of CNN you know.

My problem with your statements is the question of who suppresses the information.

[joel2006]

You need to specify in what country as these definitions change according to the country. Most people who are 'black' in the US would legally be 'colored' South Africa

[r3vbr]

Put a black man, a jewish man, and a chinese on the same room.

I will bet all my money against 100$ of your money that I can identify which is which.

[Darryl_P]

[ QUOTE ]
Put a black man, a jewish man, and a chinese on the same room.

I will bet all my money against 100$ of your money that I can identify which is which.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ah, but that's only because of social conditioning. If you had grown up alone in the wild like Tarzan, then you wouldn't see any difference between them. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MidGe]

[ QUOTE ]
Put a black man, a jewish man, and a chinese on the same room.

I will bet all my money against 100$ of your money that I can identify which is which.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if I don't try to trick you. Only if I pander to your stereotypes.

[purnell]

[ QUOTE ]
Can anyone doubt the crime rate, out of wedlock birth rates, and AIDS rates are higher among people subjectively identified as black? (Fill in your own examples for other races here.)

[/ QUOTE ]

These are cultural indicators- you're talking about sociology, not biology, and no one doubts that a social construct like race can influence behavior.

Also, "crime rate" is a statistic based on convictions. Do you doubt that U.S. police officers look a little closer at people with dark skin? I'm not saying that most of the people in jail are innocent, but rather that they are more likely to be caught if their skin isn't pink, because that's who the cops are looking at.

[allinrenco]

I bet you a 100 dollars that I can tell you what the difference is between the 'sun' and the 'moon'...

[ QUOTE ]

Ah, but that's only because of social conditioning. If you had grown up alone in the wild like Tarzan, then you wouldn't see any difference between them. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

[allinrenco]

A blond guy makes his blond wife pregnant. Then to his big surprise, when the baby comes out it is completely black. The guy takes the baby to the dokter and asks: is it possible that this baby is not mine, but from somebody from another race?

The dokter thinks for a while, and then answers:

"well we cannot be absolutely sure ..."

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The validity of human races is a subject of much debate. The American Anthropological Association, drawing on biological research, states that "The concept of race is a social and cultural construction. . . . Race simply cannot be tested or proven scientifically," and that, "It is clear that human populations are not unambiguous, clearly demarcated, biologically distinct groups. The concept of 'race' has no validity . . . in the human species."

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

"I see", the blond man says, "so maybe it is mine!"

"It is definetly a possibility" the dokter continues,

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
85 percent of human variation occurs within populations, and not between populations

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
This distribution of skin color and its geographic patterning—with people whose ancestors lived predominantly near the equator having darker skin than those with ancestors who lived predominantly in higher latitudes—indicate that this attribute has been under strong selective pressure. Darker skin appears to be strongly selected for in equatorial regions to prevent sunburn, skin cancer, the photolysis of folate, and damage to sweat glands

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

"Ahah" the blond man says, "and since I am living in America.."

"Exactly" the dokter answers.

Then the blond man ask: "But is it maybe possibile that it is from a Latino?"

"Well", the dokter replies...

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
many parts of the United States, categories such as Hispanic or Latino are viewed to constitute a race, though others see Hispanic as a linguistic and cultural grouping coming from a variety of backgrounds. In Europe, such a distinction, suggesting that South Europeans are not European or white, would seem odd at least or possibly even insulting.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

"Ok, then that is not really a possibility then", the blond man answers.

"No it is not", and he continues:

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The problem arises of distinguishing black Africans as a racial group; it doesn't work because it is a paraphyletic classification. In other words, under a phylogenetic classification, considering black Africans as a single racial group would require one to include every living person on Earth within that single African "race", because the genetic variation of the rest of the world represents essentially a single subtree within that of Africa

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]