Is Race Biologically Real Essay

Scholars say that the term race should not be used because it does not have any basis in scientific fact and really has no use today. According to the AAA’s statement on race, there is 94% variance in genes of individuals within one “racial” group. Race has its basis in colonization, when trying to conjure reasons why some groups of people, i.e. Native Americans and Africans, had lower places in society than the white people. That’s why the groups of “races” are so broad and meaningless today. The concept of race is just used to spread prejudice and give so called “scientific reasons” to discriminate against another group. The term

What is race? Some people attach "race" to a biological meaning, yet others use "race" as a socially constructed concept. “Most biologists and anthropologists do not recognize race as a biologically valid classification, in part because there is more genetic variation within groups than between them” (. So, it is clear that even though race does not have a biological meaning, it does have a social meaning - usually detrimental to our social harmony. Race is neither an essence nor an illusion, but

The question that seems to be an ongoing topic of discussions is whether or not biological differences has any scientific validity when relating to race. The concept of race was established over the years based on physical features and variations of skin tone. These variations stem from environmental conditions causing slight variations in our genome. The essence of Homo sapiens is the same with slight variations in the DNA strands know as alleles. These variations are what cause physical differences that make up what we have defined over the years classified as different races. The variations have not evolved enough to prevent reproduction amongst the races.

Kwame Anthony Appiah's article “Racisms”, claims racism to be a view of racialism which are the “heritable characteristics, possessed by the members of our species, that allow us to divide them into smaller sets of races… these races share certain traits…” (Appiah). Appiah argues that humans need a definition of

Race is a lot like language in which it has been determined and created by masses of people rather than just one person. For example, over last 200 years, the definition of white in the United States has changed a lot and that’s

Everything is a social construct. And just because it is socially constructed does not make it insignificant or unreal. Think of it in terms of gender. Sure, our sex is determined by biological factors but our gender is socially constructed. Same thing goes with race. Sure, biologically there are differences in skin tone and possibly some other physical features, but the concept of race itself and the culture and identity

The concept of race dates back to recent human history. Race is an integral part of life for individuals residing in the United States. However, this concept of “race”, that many Americans believe to be true, has no biological backing; it is merely a social construct. Looking at genetics, and even evolution it becomes clear that race is not real. But, even though race is not real, it can have very real consequences (such as racism). So in this sense race becomes a very real thing, as it affects millions of people living today. Race, biologically is not a real thing, but due to its impact, socially and culturally, it has become real.

The idea of race is real. But racial classification was built on a myth.

Race is not a biological reality because there are no indications of some biological DNA that would have a certain outcomes of a race. The variation in skin tone comes from the mix of certain races. For example, the mix of black and white would result a skin color of Latino. However, the mix of white and yellow (Asians) will most likely result a child having more essential characteristics of white people. It is impossible to classify humans into races because human is making a new race every single moment from the combination of two people who come from different races. Light skin and dark skin have a lot to deal with the temperature, latitude and langtitude of the region. It could be characterized by a regions, instead of ethnic groups. Race

Is race real? That is a question many people have been asking for many decades. The history of the idea of race was constructed during the 18th century during the times of African Slavery. The Englishmen prior had exploited Indians and Irish people, with noticing that they were not capable of tolerating certain diseases and work conditions they decided to exploit Africans. Therefore, the Englishman realized that African people were more fit in doing their job demands because they previously had farming experience and were immune to the old world diseases. As time passed many more Africans were being shipped to the New World and being exploited to work under horrible conditions and no pay. Towards the end of the eighteen century, there was a

Race is not all biologically real. According to Fuentes, race cannot be categorized as black, Asian or white because there are morphological and physiological variations (Fuentes 2012:74). Humans are all one race, whether they are different in skin color, body shape and size. Many religious beliefs support the idea of everyone being equal, regardless of the previous differentiations mention above, but science has devoted to the study of where humanity has originated and has expanded the idea of the word 'race'. Scientifically, humanity rose from the first ancient apes that best fit the characterizations of today's humans. Whether this is true or not, it is indeed very convincing that perhaps our first ancestors could have spread to different

The English term ‘race’ is believed to originate from the Spanish word raza, which means ‘breed’ or ‘stock’ (Race). People use race to define other groups, this separation of groups is based largely on physical features. Features like skin color and hair don’t affect the fundamental biology of human variation (Hotz). Race is truly only skin deep, there are no true biological separations between two ‘racial’ groups. Scientifically speaking, there is more variation between single local groups than there is between two large, global groups; the human variation is constantly altering (Lewontin). The majority of today’s anthropologists agree that race is a form of social categorization, not the separation of groups based on biological

Is race a biological myth? First, what is race? According to thefreedictionary.com website, race is defined as a group of people identified as distinct from other groups because of supposed physical or genetic traits shared by the group. This website also says that, “Most biologists and anthropologists do not recognize race as a biologically valid classification, in part because there is more genetic variation within groups than between them”. These groups of people are united and classified together based on common history, nationality, or geographic distribution. When looking at this definition, my thoughts were that it says nothing about skin color, so I decided to pull out good old Webster’s. According to Webster’s dictionary, race is defined as division of mankind, based on skin color. How can two definitions of the same word be so different, is my question? Our books says, there are lots of different definitions for this word, and I found that to be true. Why must we classify people by the color of their skin, it just makes no sense to me. Our book says, we don’t, it also says all these meanings are inaccurate and based on theories scientists discarded generations ago. (Racial and Ethnic Diversity in the USA, 2014, p.9)

I used to think that race was a social construct more of a biological reality until I read all these articles. They changed my perspective and I have come to realize different things. My opinion is now divided into two; I am in that middle point where I can see both ways of the argument as valid and reasonable and agree with both. First, I will explain why I think it is a biological reality, then, I will explain why it can also be a social construct, and lastly how have these debates shaped the views about the nature of ethnicity and consequently defined ethnic identity. We have to avoid viewing either explanation with a negative meaning. The negative history that comes attached to the word “race” is what I think makes us be defensive whenever we hear it and close ourselves up to any reasonable answer we might have to the question, is it a biological reality or a social construct?

There is nothing real about race, a social construct, unlike a river which is absolute. A river will escist regardless of people thinking, agreeing or accepting that it does exist. Race requires people to collectively agree that it does exist , unlike a river.