What if many of the things you thought were true simply weren’t? Could you let go of your old beliefs? Would you? What if they struck at the core of some of your most basic concepts of self? In earlier times people have confronted this unnerving reality, generally as the scientific revolution rolled over their old ideas. We seem to think we are immune; that everything we know is the truth.
Thomas Kuhn, in his transforming The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, argues that science is not a steady, cumulative acquisition of knowledge. Instead, “science is a series of peaceful interludes punctuated by intellectually violent revolutions.” After such revolutions, “one conceptual world view is replaced by another.” It is time for another revolution and this one involves the entire concept of race.
As a scientific fact the black race doesn’t exist; neither do the white or Asian. There is no race gene. In the year 2000, when the scientists at the National Institutes of Health announced that they had put together a draft of the entire sequence of the human genome, the researchers unanimously declared that there is only one race — the human race.
The Hispanic race didn’t even exist until the 1970 census – they needed some classification for “them.” Here is a subversive idea; what if there truly isn’t any “them”? What if the whole concept of “them” is simply a creation of our classification? One can take data and classify it in a myriad of ways, but the classification doesn’t become real in any physical sense.
If we treat the idea of race like any other scientific concept, old, invalid thinking must be discarded when new discoveries are made. Often this demands a profound shift in thinking. Copernicus’s discovery that the earth is not the center of the universe is an example of a similar realization that demanded this type of profound shift.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - gazelle
'Race' is an artifact of the past, although it persists in people's head. Race does not exist.
Ethnicity and culture are more useful (concepts). But it is a mistake to think that any culture or ethnicity is 'pure' - that is also never true except for relatively short periods of time.
Thats a lesson difficult to accept for many.
2 - JELIEL³
There is race, the human one. Any physical traits that differentiate groups from others are effects of environmental adaptation causes for the most part. Not genetic ones.
Besides, any boundary is a created and maintained one. In your mind. Human beings are all the same from the saintly to the most vile. They all want the same thing. To be happy. The only problem, is how they think they must proceed to achieve said happiness.
Same hardware, differently configured operating system. But still the same.
3 - Nancy
While I'm aware of the genetic lack of classification, how do the very recognizable phenotypic traits that define various 'races' occur? There must be something that dictates that most if not all persons descended from this group or that have this or that physical traits, otherwise there wouldn't even be specifically recognizable groups such as asians, blacks, indians, whites, etc.? Also, while there may not be any genetic markers, in forensics when analyzing remains, it is certainly possible to say with considerable probability (& later be proved correct 99% of the time) that an individual is white, black, asian, etc. based on the skeletal aggregate measurements & build, in addition to being able to (generally) state gender, age, etc. if the proper bones are present.
4 - gazelle
Nancy,
as far as i know, genetic traits have spread and mixed very widely all over the world through millenia of migrations. it is still, i think not established, that the oldest human dna in india for instance of its most isolated tribe is more indian or african.
in a different vein european 'white' people, who would normally seem not to have moved for millenia from their area, surprised in their genetic analysis to find traits from particular tribes from particular regions in africa and other parts of the world.
Should i say this is the norm?
but I would go to scientific american or nature to put a stamp on the nuances of this very intersting subject.
best
5 - John Conlin
Hi Nancy,
I included the quotes from Thomas Kuhn on paradigm shift since that is what is required to answer these questions " one must change your world view. Of course we are all more like our more recent ancestors than more distant ones (not really rocket science) " and these differences (both external and internal) are based on various breeding groups that have existed in relatively recent time (I’m an ex-geologist so I look at time from a more realistic viewpoint, i.e. from about 3.5 billion years ago when the first pulse of life began on this planet). These differences show themselves in many areas " but they do not “create” the existence of the black and white races.
All “blacks” do not remotely have the same physical traits " there are just specific ones that are used to group them in this racist category. Asians all look the same? Japanese, Chinese, Laotian, Vietnamese… go to Asia and see if they agree. But since we all come from somewhere, we just didn’t magically appear on the planet one day, these breeding groups can be identified by genetics " perhaps there are 20 such groups, perhaps 50, this is not my point. The genetics are much finer than these broad stokes of “black”, “white”, etc. Many simply take the data and place the racial concepts of “black”, etc. on top of them. The data doesn’t “create” the races, the preconceived notion of race does. This is the paradigm shift of which I speak.
And when in doubt let’s look to those who study the field - when the scientists at the National Institutes of Health announced they had put together a draft of the entire sequence of the human genome, the researchers unanimously declared there is only one race -- the human race. Race is a social construct " it is made up by societies.
So says the American Anthropological Association (AAA) and the vast majority of experts in the field. To quote the 1998 AAA Statement on “Race”: www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm
Today scholars in many fields argue that "race" as it is understood in the United States of America was a social mechanism invented during the 18th century…
From its inception, this modern concept of "race" was modeled after an ancient theorem of the Great Chain of Being, which posited natural categories on a hierarchy established by God or nature.
"Race" thus evolved as a worldview, a body of prejudgments that distorts our ideas about human differences and group behavior. Racial beliefs constitute myths about the diversity in the human species and about the abilities and behavior of people homogenized into "racial" categories. The myths fused behavior and physical features together in the public mind,…
A “social mechanism invented”? A “hierarchy established by God or nature”? “Myths”? Why do we continue to pay homage to an idea that is clearly not true in any scientific manner? This is the paradigm shift. I realize we all look different and in the past individuals have been classified based on these outward physical appearances; it is just that these groups are our own creation and we keep them alive by the simple act of keeping them alive.
People are afraid to discuss some of this since there are most assuredly differences in many of these breeding groups, including IQ and thousands of other traits. This might be of some interest to scientists who study the field but ultimately you and I deal with individuals " and each of them is very unique. And none of them are defined by the failed scientific theory of race.
I have an ongoing challenge to those who claim there is such a thing as race. I simply ask them to define the “black” and “white” races for me. The only ones who try immediately start talking about the finer points of genetics. But as used in the everyday world, “black” this, and “white” that, they are talking about a whole lot more than genetics. This is the definition I desire. I’m still waiting for ANY ONE to define it for me. If these races are real, physical things, please define it for me. I certainly don’t seem to get it. I’m little slow (must be my race ;-)
6 - Richard Brodie
It seems to be the white race that is more fragile and destined for extinction. Think about it. If you are of mixed lineage, say three pure white grandparents and one pure black one, how do you fill out the "ethnicity" question on the census form? African American, of course! Why doesn't it hold in reverse - why doesn't three black grandparents and one white grandparent equate to being considered white?
Well, one motivation might be the preferential treatment one could expect to get with minority status when it comes to welfare handouts and government mandated quotas. But perhaps genetically dark traits and features are dominant and stand out as more unmistakeably recognizable, so that if one is for example only one tenth black, the African component is perceptible, but if one is only one tenth white it is more difficult to conclude from observation that there is a Caucasian component.
7 - Victor Lana
I recall a teacher in high school saying one time that in another hundred or so years, "race" as we know it would be history. His reasoning was simple: people are people and are going to see the fallacy of categories and will keep defying them, eventually intermingling so often as to blur any distinction.
8 - gazelle
my black features are totally unrecognizable except that i also think, so i am black.
9 - Natalie Davis
Mr. Brodie wrote: "If you are of mixed lineage, say three pure white grandparents and one pure black one, how do you fill out the "ethnicity" question on the census form? African American, of course!"
Of course? I have never done so. I suppose you subscribe to the vile "one drop" rule. I sign forms as "other" and write in "human." It makes people upset, but I don't care. Accuracy matters.
Mr. Conlin, thank you, thank you, thank you. It is rare that essays on the fallacious concept of "race" exhibit such good sense. Nearly three years ago, I wrote such an article - there were those who appreciated it, but they were damn few. I received more ridicule and abuse than anything else. Typical.
Anyhoo, goddess bless you.
NR Davis
10 - Nancy
I personally consider we're ALL 'black' - or at least, of African extraction, since we ALL hark back to Africa ultimately anyway; it's just a matter of how far one has to go back. I was just thinking about the physical anthropological parameters used by forensics people when profiling an unknown victim/remains. I was very interested in the recent program on MLK day tracing various person's DNA. A few were quite surprised to find out what they were - or weren't - as far as "racial" heritage was concerned. It shouldn't make such a big difference to anyone: skin us all, and we're all pretty gross looking.
11 - tommyd
God created man in different colors to live in their own respective geographical areas. Once man decided to play God and mix and conquer and colonise did the real deep trouble begin.
If you're looking to create a raceless society, you might as well come out and call yourselves Communists because that's what you are. It's a completely Marxist idea that "race doesn't exist." Wear your red berets proudly Young Pioneers!
Spit.
12 - lumpy
tommy, i've suspected you were a racist before but was never sure. thanks for making it absolutely clear.
13 - Natalie Davis
Mr. TommyD, are you insane? Many scientists say life started in one place. As humans multiplied, groups migrated to different areas of the planet. Given that humans ostensibly looked the same prior to the migrations, are you saying a god intended for specific ones to migrate to specific areas? What a weird outlook. And yes, thanks for revealing yourself.
I'm with Ms. Nancy - we are all one human family. We are all related. All this melanin crap is meaningless.
14 - Michael J. West
I am pretty sure TommyD was being ironical, Ms. Davis.
15 - Eric Olsen
it is absolute fact that we're all Africans - some of us have just been away a bit longer than others
16 - gazelle
tommyd:
all geographical areas are connected, if you start walking one from one end and walk all over. you will also notice on the way that the 'race features' change very gradually, say if you are going north in africa or across, and crossing around the mediterranean and walking to northern europe, or to asia via the old silk road...thats what will surprise you.... people have been moving long long long long before history started being written down.
now if you take a ship or plane from central africa to sweden or japan, you might 'think' races are distinct
...g
17 - RedTard
Oh no, the PC are back out in full force. Race is simply a way to describe certain sets of features shared by groups of people indicating their probable ancestry. The word has meaning, and will continue to, because we gave it that meaning.
He challenges people to define white and black as "proof" of the existence of race without relying on the DNA components. I challenge him to define the color orange without relying on the electromagnetic spectrum. Neither one is possible but both race and the color orange exist. (even before DNA or the electromagnetic spectrum was discovered)
If race is meaningless because of it's fuzzy edges then ethnicity and culture and a whole slew of social science foundations are equally meaningless. I doubt these scientists and the author plan on dismantling this whole department that created them. I suspect if it did become popular to eliminate race just ot get rid of the word it would simply be replaced with ethnicity.
Would we need to come up with a new word for racists? Calling someone an ethnicitist just doesn't have the same ring to it.
18 - Natalie Davis
Mr. West, I pray he was being ironic.
19 - John Conlin
About 3.5 to 3.8 billion years ago (about 1.3 trillion days ago for those who like that measurement) life began on this planet " the Hand of God or the Hand of Evolution " either way it is the same. It has flowed as a constant, unbroken stream since then. We (and all life presently living) are at the edge of this flow. We are related to all humans on the planet; not as some touchy feely philosophical sense, but as a real, physical fact. We are related to all life that has EVER lived on this planet " again as a real, physical fact " as real as the keyboard and monitor that sits in front of us.
Remember the concept of paradigm shift " some simply can’t or won’t try (and we can ignore the racists, everyone has the right to be stupid). And it does take a paradigm shift. Hate to make your brains hurt but many evolutionary biologists will tell you that even the concept of species is questionable. It is very difficult to comprehend (much like quantum mechanics or big bang cosmology) but as a snapshot in time the concept of species makes sense. Looking at life over a longer period and the concept becomes much more blurred.
Sorry RedTard, I’m still waiting for ANY definition (use genetics if you desire but make the definition fit the way “black” and “white” are used in common communication) I look forward to your attempt " and please stop with the PC strawman, I’m about as un-PC as you can get.
As for ancestry and ethnicity " here comes more brain pain. It is simply the continuation of scientifically false ethnic group thinking from our less knowledgeable and more tribal past. The American Medical Association states it rather clearly “ethnicity is universally recognized as being socially defined.”
http://www.ama-assn.org/ama/pub/category/13676.html Which is just another way of saying it has no factual basis.
Of course we all have ancestors. You did not just appear on the planet one day. And of course your ancestors had to live some place. And of course we are genetically more like our more recent ancestors than our more distant ancestors. We are not talking rocket science here.
But are you defined by your ancestors? Is it they that define who you are? Why does it matter that some of my ancestors can be traced back to counties we now call Ireland and Germany? These countries, as they are now understood, have only existed for a millisecond on the cosmic clock. What is so special about this small piece of time that we use it to define who we are. The honest answer is it does not. It is simply a historical artifact.
Sorry to make you confront the facts but such is life. For a GREAT read, do spend some time with Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Modern society, somewhat arrogantly assumes that only those “less informed” from years back had to confront profound paradigm shift " sorry folks, this one is ours to live.
As soon as I post this comment I’ll post another to our friend Blogcritics " it is called “Who You Are " the Illusion of Ethnicity”. For those who fight the truth, enjoy the brain pain. For the rest, you warm my heart. Truly thanks - jc
20 - TA Dodger
There is no scientific basis for race? That isn't exactly revolutionary information. Of course, saying something is a social construct is not the same thing as saying it doesn't exist.
21 - RedTard
Here is a simple proof that race has meaning. If I stand Justin Timberlake, Jackie Chan, and Kanye West in front of a group of 6th graders at any school in the country and ask which of them is black or Asian or white the response will be overwhelmingly consistent.
Racial terms convey useful information (meaning) that allows people to distinguish between the three. Your welcome to deny it all you want but you're absolutely wrong.
22 - TA Dodger
Distinctions between races are
a) Arbitrary
b) Socially constructed
c) NOT based on genetics / science
but are they not *real*? I don't even know what that means.
Oh, and the above three points were what I was taught throughout college. The fact that you can't determine someone's race with a blood test has already been accepted (at least among academics). Old news.
Of course those professors still talked about race, since talking about race is important if you want to talk about things like racism and the way people experience their day to day lives.
23 - chantal stone
well said, TA...no matter what science does or does not prove, you can not erase experience.
24 - RedTard
"There is no scientific basis for race?"
There may not be, but you can send off a sample of your DNA to a lab and get tested to see what percentage of each race you are. Sounds pretty scientific to me.
The same PC nerds in the social science departments who brought us brilliant theories like 'cultural relativism' (basically, there's no such thing as right and wrong) are at it again. Their next completely useless point of view: 'race doesn't exist'. I wonder what non-obvious name they'll give that one.
25 - RedTard
c) NOT based on genetics / science
That's no longer the case.
A recent study tracking genetic racial markers to self identified race in the US showed an almost unbelievable 99.86% correlation between self identified race and genetic markers. Even here in the melting pot race is real and it is science.
The link to the study.