The Idea of Race
Race is a biological term, a biological idea. A race of a species is a group within that species that has some set of characteristics that distinguish it from other group(s) within that species. A race (or subspecies, variety, cultivar, breed or other such distinction) simply means that there is enough variation for humans to see it as worth noting and reliably different at least in some sense.
At some point in time, some human noticed the usefulness of the term race in describing differences among all types of species besides Homo sapiens and then decided to include Homo sapiens among the types of species that could be known to have races. After all, no one will disagree that there are biologically significant differences between groups of Humans and that groups of people can be formed out of individuals within the global population that share these biologically significant differences.
This, of course, is a social construction. It is a human fabricated idea that divides the universe into more manageable chunks. These smaller and more manageable chunks make the process of choice and thought easier, but are prone to making errors, particularly along the margins of the chunks. For example, consider the distinctive curliness of the hair of Native Africans. Certainly not every single curl is the same width, and certainly the average width of curls varies from head to head. So any descriptive simplification regarding these distinctive curls will inherently not accurately describe those Native Africans with larger width curls or smaller width curls. Duh!
The fact that race is a social construction is not something to debate, it is not an argument to be won, it is a fact. The greater and more difficult question is whether that social construction is useful. While we ponder this question, if you don't find it useful, don't use it. If you find it useful, go ahead. However to presume that because race is a social construction that it is an immoral, offensive, or logically invalid idea, is not logically founded. If you disagree and have logically valid reasons for doing so, I'd love to hear them.
At some point in time, some human noticed the usefulness of the term race in describing differences among all types of species besides Homo sapiens and then decided to include Homo sapiens among the types of species that could be known to have races. After all, no one will disagree that there are biologically significant differences between groups of Humans and that groups of people can be formed out of individuals within the global population that share these biologically significant differences.
This, of course, is a social construction. It is a human fabricated idea that divides the universe into more manageable chunks. These smaller and more manageable chunks make the process of choice and thought easier, but are prone to making errors, particularly along the margins of the chunks. For example, consider the distinctive curliness of the hair of Native Africans. Certainly not every single curl is the same width, and certainly the average width of curls varies from head to head. So any descriptive simplification regarding these distinctive curls will inherently not accurately describe those Native Africans with larger width curls or smaller width curls. Duh!
The fact that race is a social construction is not something to debate, it is not an argument to be won, it is a fact. The greater and more difficult question is whether that social construction is useful. While we ponder this question, if you don't find it useful, don't use it. If you find it useful, go ahead. However to presume that because race is a social construction that it is an immoral, offensive, or logically invalid idea, is not logically founded. If you disagree and have logically valid reasons for doing so, I'd love to hear them.
posted by johnathlon at 2:37 PM
0 comments
