Race (human classification)

The term race refers to the concept of dividing people into s or s on the basis of various sets of characteristics and beliefs about common ancestry. The most widely used human racial are based on visible s (especially,  and hair texture), and self-identification.

Conceptions of race, as well as specific ways of, vary by culture and over time, and are often for scientific as well as  and  reasons. The controversy ultimately revolves around whether or not races are natural types or socially constructed, and the degree to which observed differences in ability and achievement, categorized on the basis of race, are a product of inherited (i.e. genetic) traits or environmental, social and cultural factors.

Some argue that although "race" is a valid concept in other species, it cannot be applied to humans. Many scientists have argued that race definitions are imprecise, arbitrary, derived from, have many exceptions, have many gradations, and that the numbers of races delineated vary according to the culture making the racial distinctions; thus they reject the notion that any definition of race pertaining to humans can have taxonomic rigour and validity. Today most scientists study human genotypic and phenotypic variation using concepts such as "population" and "". Many anthropologists contend that while the features on which racial categorizations are made may be based on genetic factors, the idea of race itself, and actual divisions of persons into groups based on selected hereditary features, are s.

History
The historical definition of was an immutable and distinct type or, sharing distinct racial characteristics such as constitution, temperament, and mental abilities. These races were not conceived as being related with each other, but formed a hierarchy of inherent value called the with Europeans usually at the top.

The word "race", along with many of the ideas now associated with the term, were products of and  during the. (Smedley 1999)

s from to  tended to invest much more importance in  or tribal affiliation than with one's physical appearance (Dikötter 1992; Goldenberg 2003). and Roman authors also attempted to explain and categorize visible al differences among peoples known to them.

models of race mixed ideas with the notion that humanity as a whole was descended from,  and , the three , producing distinct  (n),  (n), and  (an) peoples.

During the Age of Discovery, a set of  took hold that linked inherited physical differences between groups to inherited ual,, and  qualities. (Banton 1977) In various cultures, brutal conflicts between ethnic groups have existed throughout history and across the world, and against Africans also exists today in non-colonised countries such as  and. The first scientific attempts to classify humans by categories of race date from the 17th century, along with the development of European imperialism and colonization around the world. The first post- published classification of humans into distinct races seems to be 's Nouvelle division de la terre par les différents espèces ou races qui l'habitent ("New division of Earth by the different species or races which inhabit it"), published in 1684.

As time progressed, Darwin's theory of evolution was applied to races. By this time, anthropologists considered humans to be related to each other. The word "race," interpreted to mean, was introduced into in about 1580, from the Old French rasse (1512), from Italian razza, which may have been derived from the Latin word generatio (a begetting). The etymology can be further traced back to Latin gens (clan, stock, people) and genus (birth, descent, origin, race, stock, family) which in turn comes from the Greek γένος (race, stock, or family).

This late origin for the English and French terms is consistent with the thesis that the concept of "race" as defining a very small number of groups of human beings based on lineage dates from the time of. Older concepts that were also at least partly based on common descent, such as and, entail a much larger number of groupings.

In the 19th century a number of wrote on race:, , , , , , , and. As the science of took shape in the 19th century, European and American scientists increasingly sought explanations for the behavioral and cultural differences they attributed to groups (Stanton 1960).

Modern race debate
There is considerable discussion and controversy surrounding modern definitions of "race." There are various theories and models. Some models are based and its potential relation to, while some relate race to. Questions about the relevance of race in the of  is an ongoing debate.

Current views across disciplines
One result of debates over the meaning and validity of the concept "race" is that the current literature across different disciplines regarding human variation lacks, though within some fields, such as biology, there is strong consensus. Some studies use the word race in its early  sense. Many others still use the term race, but use it to mean a population,, or. Others eschew the concept of race altogether, and use the concept of population as a less problematical unit of analysis.

In the 19th century, race was a central concept of. In 1866,, the founder of the , declared that anthropology’s primary truth “is the existence of well-marked psychological and moral distinctions in the different races of men.” However, this view was largely rejected by the community of social sciences in the second half of the 20th century.

Scientific support for the Caucasoid, Negroid, Mongoloid terminology of racial classification has diminished over the past century. These terms originally denoted skull types and sprang from the technique known as , but these disciplines have been abandoned by the mainstream scientific community. Today they have only two common uses. They are used in  as an indicator of ethnicity of skeletal remains. And they can be used as euphemisms for making racially based distinctions that are now regarded as being and baseless by mainstream culture.

Since 1932, some s introducing physical anthropology have increasingly come to reject race as a valid concept: from 1932 to 1976, only seven out of thirty-two rejected race; from 1975 to 1984, thirteen out of thirty-three rejected race; from 1985 to 1993, thirteen out of nineteen rejected race. According to one academic journal entry, where 78 percent of the articles in the 1931 Journal of Physical Anthropology employed these or nearly synonymous terms reflecting a bio-race paradigm, only 36 percent did so in 1965, and just 28 percent did in 1996. The American Anthropological Association, drawing on biological research, currently holds 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".

In an ongoing debate, some geneticists argue that race is neither a meaningful concept nor a useful device, and even that genetic differences among groups are biologically meaningless, on the grounds that more genetic variation exists within such races than among them, and that racial traits overlap without discrete boundaries. Other geneticists, in contrast, argue that categories of self-identified race/ethnicity or biogeographic ancestry are both valid and useful, that these categories correspond with clusters, and that this correspondence implies that genetic factors might contribute to unexplained phenotypic variation between groups.

In February, 2001, the editors of the medical journal Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine asked authors to no longer use "race" as an explanatory variable and not to use obsolescent terms. Some other peer-reviewed journals, such as the New England Journal of Medicine and the American Journal of Public Health, have made similar endeavours. Furthermore, the National Institutes of Health recently issued a program announcement for grant applications through February 1, 2006, specifically seeking researchers who can investigate and publicize among primary care physicians the detrimental effects on the nation's health of the practice of medical racial profiling using such terms. The program announcement quoted the editors of one journal as saying that, "analysis by race and ethnicity has become an analytical knee-jerk reflex."

A, taken in 1985 (Lieberman et al. 1992), asked 1,200 American anthropologists how many disagree with the following proposition: "There are biological races in the species Homo sapiens." The responses were: The figure for physical anthropologists at granting departments was slightly higher, rising from 41% to 42%, with 50% agreeing. This survey, however, did not specify any particular definition of race (although it did clearly specify biological race within the species Homo Sapiens); it is difficult to say whether those who supported the statement thought of race in taxonomic or population terms.
 * s 41%
 * s 53%

The same survey, taken in 1999, showed the following changing results for anthropologists:
 * s 69%
 * s 80%

In the race concept was rejected by only 25 percent of anthropologists in 2001, although: "Unlike the U.S. anthropologists, Polish anthropologists tend to regard race as a term without taxonomic value, often as a substitute for population."

Races as a social construction
Even as the idea of "race" was becoming a powerful organizing principle in many societies, the shortcomings of the concept were apparent. In the Old World, the gradual transition in appearances from one group to adjacent groups emphasized that "one variety of mankind does so sensibly pass into the other, that you cannot mark out the limits between them," as Blumenbach observed in his writings on human variation (Marks 1995, p. 54). As anthropologists and other evolutionary scientists have shifted away from the language of race to the term population to talk about genetic differences,, and  have re-conceptualized the term "race" as a cultural category or , in other words, as a particular way that some people have of talking about themselves and others. As Stephan Palmie has recently summarized, race "is not a thing but a social relation"; or, in the words of Katya Gibel Mevorach, "a metonym," "a human invention whose criteria for differentiation are neither universal nor fixed but have always been used to manage difference." As such it cannot be a useful analytical concept; rather, the use of the term "race" itself must be analyzed. Moreover, they argue that biology will not explain why or how people use the idea of race: history and social relationships will. For example, the fact that in many parts of the United States, categories such as or  are viewed to constitute a race, while others view "Hispanic" as referring to an, has more to do with the changing position of Hispanics in U.S. society, especially in the context of the  and.

Racism
Racism has many definitions, the most common and widely accepted being the belief that members of one are intrinsically superior or inferior to members of other races.

As  racism carries references to race-based, , , , or , the term has varying and often hotly contested definitions.  is a related term intended to avoid these negative meanings. According to the , racism is a belief or that all members of each  possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially to distinguish it as being either superior or inferior to another race or races. The  defines racism as a belief that  is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race, and that it is also the  based on such a belief. The  defines racism thus: the belief that human races have distinctive characteristics which determine their respective, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule or dominate others.

Race and intelligence
Researchers have reported differences in the average test scores of various ethnic groups. The interpretation, causes, accuracy and reliability of these differences are highly controversial. Some researchers, such as, , and have argued that such differences are at least partially genetic. Others, for example, argue that the differences largely owe to social and economic inequalities. Still others have such as and  have argued that categories such as "race" and "intelligence" are cultural constructs that render any attempt to explain such differences (whether genetically or sociologically) meaningless.

The is the rise of average Intelligence Quotient (IQ) test scores, an effect seen in most parts of the world, although at varying rates. Scholars therefore believe that rapid increases in average IQ seen in many places are much too fast to be as a result of changes in brain physiology and more likely as a result of environmental changes. The fact that environment has a significant effect on IQ demolishes the case for the use of IQ data as a source of genetic information.

Race in biomedicine
There is an active debate among biomedical researchers about the meaning and importance of race in their research. The primary impetus for considering race in biomedical research is the possibility of improving the prevention and treatment of s by predicting hard-to-ascertain factors on the basis of more easily ascertained characteristics. Some have argued that in the absence of cheap and widespread genetic tests, racial identification is the best way to predict for certain diseases, such as, , and , which are genetically linked and more prevalent in some populations than others. The most well-known examples of genetically-determined disorders that vary in incidence among populations would be, , and.

There has been criticism of associating disorders with race. For example, in the United States sickle cell is typically associated with black people, but this trait is also found in people of Mediterranean, Middle Eastern or Indian ancestry. The sickle cell trait offers some resistance to. In regions where malaria is present sickle cell has been and consequently the proportion of people with it is greater. Therefore, it has been argued that sickle cell should not be associated with a particular race, but rather with having ancestors who lived in a malaria-prone region. Africans living in areas where there is no malaria, such as the East African highlands, have prevalence of sickle cell as low as parts of Northern Europe.

Another example of the use of race in medicine is the recent approval of, a medication for congestive heart failure targeted at black people in the United States. Several researchers have questioned the scientific basis for arguing the merits of a medication based on race, however. As Stephan Palmie has recently pointed out, black Americans were disproportionately affected by Hurricane Katrina, but for social and not climatological reasons; similarly, certain diseases may disproportionately affect different races, but not for biological reasons. Several researchers have suggested that BiDil was re-designated as a medicine for a race-specific illness because its manufacturer, Nitromed, needed to propose a new use for an existing medication in order to justify an extension of its patent and thus monopoly on the medication, not for pharmacological reasons.

and intermixture also have an effect on predicting a relationship between race and "race linked disorders". Multiple sclerosis is typically associated with people of European descent and is of low risk to people of African descent. However due to gene flow between the populations, African Americans have elevated levels of MS relative to Africans. Notable African Americans affected by MS include and. As populations continue to mix, the role of socially constructed races may diminish in identifying diseases.

Identification
In an attempt to provide general descriptions that may facilitate the job of s seeking to apprehend suspects, the United States employs the term "race" to summarize the general appearance (skin color, hair texture, eye shape, and other such easily noticed characteristics) of individuals whom they are attempting to apprehend. From the perspective of officers, it is generally more important to arrive at a description that will readily suggest the general appearance of an individual than to make a scientifically valid categorization by DNA or other such means. Thus in addition to assigning a wanted individual to a racial category, such a description will include: height, weight, eye color, scars and other distinguishing characteristics, etc.

use a classification based in the ethnic background of : W1 (White-British), W2 (White-Irish), W9 (Any other white background); M1 (White and black Caribbean), M2 (White and black African), M3 (White and Asian), M9 (Any other mixed background); A1 (Asian-Indian), A2 (Asian-Pakistani), A3 (Asian-Bangladeshi), A9 (Any other Asian background); B1 (Black Caribbean), B2 (Black African), B3 (Any other black background); O1 (Chinese), O9 (Any other). Some of the characteristics that constitute these groupings are biological and some are learned (cultural, linguistic, etc.) traits that are easy to notice.

Controversy
In many countries, such as, the state is legally banned from maintaining data based on race, which often makes the police issue wanted notices to the public that include labels like "dark skin complexion", etc. One of the factors that encourages this kind of circuitous wordings is that there is controversy over the actual relationship between crimes, their assigned punishments, and the division of people into the so called "races," leading officials to try to deemphasize the alleged race of suspects. In the United States, the practice of has been ruled to be both  and also to constitute a violation of. There is active debate regarding the cause of a marked correlation between the recorded crimes, punishments meted out, and the country's "racially divided" people. Many consider de facto an example of  in law enforcement. The history of misuse of racial categories to adversely impact one or more groups and/or to offer protection and advantage to another has a clear impact on debate of the legitimate use of known phenotypical or genotypical characteristics tied to the presumed race of both victims and perpetrators by the government.

Use of race in forensics
More recent work in racial taxonomy based on DNA cluster analysis (see ) has led law enforcement to narrow their search for individuals based on a range of phenotypical characteristics found consistent with DNA evidence.

While controversial, DNA analysis has been successful in helping police identify both victims and perpetrators by giving an indication of what phenotypical characteristics to look for and what community the individual may have lived in. For example, in one case phenotypical characteristics suggested that the friends and family of an unidentified victim would be found among the Asian community, but the DNA evidence directed official attention to missing Native Americans, where her true identity was eventually confirmed. In an attempt to avoid potentially misleading associations suggested by the word "race," this classification is called "biogeographical ancestry" (BGA), but the terms for the BGA categories are similar to those used as for race. The difference is that ancestry-informative DNA markers identify continent-of-ancestry admixture, not ethnic self-identity, and provide a wide range of phenotypical characteristics such that some people in a biogeographical category will not match the stereotypical image of an individual belonging to the corresponding race. To facilitate the work of officials trying to find individuals based on the evidence of their DNA traces, firms providing the genetic analyses also provide photographs showing a full range of phenotypical characteristics of people in each biogeographical group. Of special interest to officials trying to find individuals on the basis of DNA samples that indicate a diverse genetic background is what range of phenotypical characteristics people with that general mixture of genotypical characteristics may display.

Similarly, draw on highly heritable morphological features of human remains (e.g. cranial measurements) in order to aid in the identification of the body, including in terms of race. In a recent article anthropologist Norman Sauer asked, "if races don't exist, why are forensic anthropologists so good at identifying them." Sauer observed that the use of 19th century racial categories is widespread among forensic anthropologists:


 * "In many cases there is little doubt that an individual belonged to the Negro, Caucasian, or Mongoloid racial stock."
 * "Thus the forensic anthropologist uses the term race in the very broad sense to differentiate what are commonly known as white, black and yellow racial stocks."
 * "In estimating race forensically, we prefer to determine if the skeleton is Negroid, or Non-Negroid. If findings favor Non-Negroid, then further study is necessary to rule out Mongoloid."

According to Sauer, "The assessment of these categories is based upon copious amounts of research on the relationship between biological characteristics of the living and their skeletons." Nevertheless, he agrees with other anthropologists that race is not a valid biological taxonomic category, and that races are socially constructed. He argued there is nevertheless a strong relationship between the phenotypic features forensic anthropologists base their identifications on, and popular racial categories. Thus, he argued, forensic anthropologists apply a racial label to human remains because their analysis of physical morphology enables them to predict that when the person was alive, that particular racial label would have been applied to them.

Race in the United States
The is a   country. There is an extensive history of race-based, the abolishment of it, and its economic impact. Modern issues of race, as well as its impact in the and  development of the nation have been examined by multiple historians and researchers. There are issues and controversies with the self-identification and classification of race within the country, and several trends have emerged in the demographic movements of ethnic groups as discovered by self-reports and testing.

Race in Brazil
Compared to the, the identification of a person by race is far more fluid and flexible in Brazil than in the U.S.; however, there still are racial stereotypes and prejudices. African features have been considered less desirable; Blacks have been considered socially inferior, and Whites superior (Harris 1964: 59-60). These white values seem to be an obvious legacy of European colonization and the slave-based  (Harris 1964: 54-57). The complexity of racial classifications in Brazil is reflective of the extent of in, a society that remains highly, but not strictly,  along color lines.

Official statements and standards

 * American Anthropological Association's Statement on Race and RACE: Are we so different?a public education program developed by the American Anthropological Association.


 * American Association of Physical Anthropologists' Statement on Biological Aspects of Race
 * OMB Statistical Directive 15, "Standards for Maintaining, Collecting, and Presenting Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity", Federal Register, 30 October 1997.
 * "The Race Question",, 1950
 * US Census Bureau: Definition of Race

Popular press

 * : Race and creation (extract from : A Pilgrimage to the Dawn of Life) - On race, its usage and a theory of how it evolved. (Prospect Magazine October 2004) (see also longer extract here)
 * Race - The power of an illusion Online companion to California Newsreel's 3-part documentary about race in society, science, and history.
 * Is Race "Real"? - forum organized by the, includes a March 2005 op-ed article by A.M. Leroi from the New York Times advocating biological conceptions of race and responses from scholars in a variety of fields. - More from Leori with responses
 * Steven and Hilary Rose, The Guardian, "Why we should give up on race",
 * Times Online, "Gene tests prove that we are all the same under the skin",.
 * Michael J. Bamshad, Steve E. Olson "Does Race Exist?", Scientific American, December 2003
 * "Gene Study Identifies 5 Main Human Populations, Linking Them to Geography", Nicholas Wade, NYTimes, December 2002. Covering
 * Scientific American Magazine (December 2003 Issue) Does race exists ?.
 * DNA Study published by United Press International showing how 30% of White Americans have at least one Black ancestor
 * Yehudi O. Webster Twenty-one Arguments for Abolishing Racial Classification, The Abolitionist Examiner, June 2000
 * The Tex(t)-Mex Galleryblog, An updated, online supplement to the University of Texas Press book (2007), Tex(t)-Mex
 * Times of India - Article about Asian racism
 * South China Morning Post - Going beyond ‘sorry’

Others

 * Race FAQ by John Goodrum (argues for the existence of races)
 * American Anthropological Association's educational website on race, geared for general public with links for primary school educators and researchers
 * The Institute of Race Relations, London, UK
 * Boas's remarks on race to a general audience
 * Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic, 26-Apr-2005
 * Catchpenny mysteries of ancient Egypt, "What race were the ancient Egyptians?", Larry Orcutt.
 * Judy Skatssoon, "New twist on out-of-Africa theory", ABC Science Online, Wednesday,.
 * Racial & Ethnic Distribution of ABO Blood Types - bloodbook.com
 * "The Races of Europe" by Carleton S. Coon - collection of physical anthropological data on the indigenous European populations.
 * Are White Athletes an Endangered Species? And Why is it Taboo to Talk About It? Discussion of racial differences in athletics
 * "Does Race Exist? A proponent's perspective" - The author argues that the evidence from forensic anthropology supports the idea of race.
 * "Does Race Exist? An antagonist's perspective" - The author argues that clinal variation undermines the idea of race.