"Race" is "non-existent"?

Question

Can anyone show me the evidence that "race" is "non-existent" so to speak?

Answer 1

Because race cannot be directly determined by DNA. There is no race gene. When race is used for classification, markers for traits common to that race are used, but are not distinctive for any race. In other words, you can tell what 'race' a blood sample comes from only by looking for mutations. The cumulative weight of those mutations can indicate a probability, but it is only an assumption based on statistics. Like I said, there is no gene that is common to all the members of a particular race to the exclusion of every other race.



If a sample contains mutations for sickle-cell anemia, for example, that narrows the possibilities down to any race indigenous to the equator, but most commonly, Africans/blacks. Add that to a number of other traits or conditions which are common to blacks, but which exclude one equatorial peoples or another, and eventually you might assume that the sample is from a black person, or they may exclude black people and point to some Asian culture. Nowhere in this testing do we look for race; we look to include or exclude particular groups of people, from geographic locations, based on traits common to that region of the world, not traits common to a skin color.

Answer 2

The burden of proof in this case would be proving that a term is valid, not that it is invalid. Proponents of race based studies had hundreds of years to prove that race was a valid term, and they finally failed completely in the last century. It's not that anyone has to prove that race doesn't exist. That's like saying one has to prove that purple dragons don't exist. How does one do that? People in the field have simply come up with much better terms to define different cateogrizations. Anthropologists use "populations" to describe different groups of humans they are studying. The definition of a particular population can change depending on the study, which demonstrates the uselessness of having a hard classification system. They just don't work. They do not adequately describe human variation. Race is invalid because just doesn't work.

Answer 3

No person who has thought about it very much would say that race is "non-existent"... but it IS a social construct.



In any society at any particular moment, race can be defined differently. There is no objective system of classifying people into races. I would challenge you to present one so I can show you how subjective it is.



The most precise genetic testing can determine that a certain individual is, for example, "100% Southeastern European". However that person's family might be from Italy and perceived in the US as being "white", or they might be from Turkey and perceived as being "Arab". Moreover, the VAST majority of people will have some particular mix of regional results. That mix does not necessarily predict what race that person is perceived as being.



Most importantly, while there are relatively useful genetic markers associated with particular regions, and those genes are associated with certain physical traits, these genetic communities not been the same for all of human history. They formed from alternating episodes of migration and isolation in a particular place. Gene pools and ethnicities are always changing, always have been, always will be. We all have ancestors from Africa if we trace back far enough--does that mean we are all "black"?

Answer 4

'Race' is a difference concept that is utterly nonsensical. The way it is used by bigots actually suggests that there are such big differences between peoples that we are actually different species. Rubbish! the only way you can qualify as a different species is if you cannot breed and have viable offspring. No scientific research has ever been able to show that what are called different races are actually anything other than other Human Beings. What they are talking about is the Fact that humans are incredibly adaptable and change to fit their surroundings, which is why skin tones differ etc. The rest is cultural and nothing more.

Answer 5

Obviously, there are physical differences in peoples that are related to their ancestry, and to the extent that one talks about race as a mere matter of these physical differences, race exists. But does race carry with it any significant intrinsic differences in moral worth, intelligence, or industriousness? There's no scientific evidence that says so. Any differences here are trivial.

___The idea that race "doesn't exist" is a sloppy way of saying that race is a category of no significance, other than as a focus of prejudice.

___Unfortunately, the American left has this annoying and misleading practice of using metaphors for rhetorical emphasis, and then forgetting that the metaphor is not literal language. Metaphors are stretched language, and are false to the extent of the stretch, so to the extent that those on the left can't tell their metaphors from literalisms, they succumb to creeping delusionality. This has become quite alarming over the past 15-20 years, and it's no wonder that there are so many mental illness professionals in far-left voting districts. (The far-right has its own problems, but they're not relevant here.)

___If you go to one of the major left wing websites (MoveOn, DailyKos, Truthout), you'll find a tone of shrillness and of an inauthentic indignation that enjoys the indignation more than it hates the object of it. It's too self-congratulatory to be genuine. All those boomers who got hooked on the gratifications of their self-proclaimed moral high-ground in the sixties have introduced a couple of new generations to the opiate of the self-righteous but loony left, whose only notion of corruption is the sort that's found by following the money. They're blind to their own corruption.

___These are not stupid people, but they are just a wee bit insane. (I once knew a guy with a 200 IQ who used every point of it to defend his denial of his serious mental health issues. The far left is like him.) And that's why we end up with so many proclamations like, "Race doesn't exist".

Answer 6

I guess it all depends on your perception. If you realize that all 'races' come from a single (proven) 'race' then, no, there is no race, because there's no competition. However, those who defined race as such did so with a competitive mentality (hence the term 'race'). What 'experts' have defined as race are: *******, caucasoid, mongloid and australoid. Notice a difference? ******* is the ONLY classification NOT based on the region from whence people came, but their skin color ('*****', meaning black, is derived from the latin word 'necro' for 'dead'). Thus, the classification of race, in my mind, is truly false.

Answer 7

Biblically we are all genetic offspring of Adam, Eve coming from Adam having the same genetic string. As man group off into different parts of the world, the gene pool became more specialised, taking on different characteristics we term as racial features. the same thing happens in breeding animals(why my black puppies have white markings). But on the other hand, if we in fact evolved from some primordial slime pit, by chance. The gene pool being more diverse, and random. We would have separate geine strings that have similar characteristics, not the same family, but separate species( gorillas, chimps, monkeys and balloons, same family, separate species). Evolution by nature would have to class man by sub subspecies, same family, but separate. That sounds sort of racist to me. What is your conclusion? I have mine.

Answer 8

A method of classifying anything is only valuable if all things fit into one of the specific categories. In which category would you put Tiger Woods, Halle Berry, Beyonce? We are the human race!

Answer 9

That is what the geneticists tell us. Im not sure if I agree with that. I mean ther are some pretty clear biologica differences between the races. All the way down to the bone.

Answer 10

No.it isnt

Human skin color can range from very dark to nearly colorless (appearing pinkish white due to the blood in the skin) in different people. Skin tone is determined by the amount and type of the pigment melanin in the skin. On average, women have slightly lighter skin than men.



In general, people with ancestors from sunny regions have darker skin than people with ancestors from regions with less sunlight. However, this is complicated by the fact that there are people with ancestors from both sunny and less sunny regions, and whose skin coloring may have any shade of the spectrum of possible tones.





so its really nothing..its just where ur astors have lived depends..its just human evolution and its adaptating to ur enivirament...

So.its nothing really we all nearly the same but just different adaptions

Answer 11

Simply put........without exception. we are all the sum of a very diverse genetic pool: Over centuries and Millenia of travel and dispersal, a mixture of many cultures, nationalities, and body types.......No one is pure enough to constitute a pure race.

Of course, a racist may not agree.

Answer 12

C'mon, cut the "human race" crap, God made us this way, we all look different, so nautrally we will be seperated into "races".



There is a verse in the Bible that says: Do not look upon me because I am black. (it is as if the verse is speaking as a darker skinned person)

Answer 13

There is one human race, there are different ethnicities. Race is basically species.

Answer 14

What?



Of course it exists. I just do not believe should be relevant to much of anything.

Answer 15

Only in some peoples minds.

Answer 16

Nope, I sure as hell can't. :) Just watch the news, you see evidence of differences all the time.

Answer 17

no way, it's not