• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

OK, let's do a DEFINE race thread. I've posted a Link to the Webster definition.

LeeTJ

Diamond Member
I get so tired of the arguments. every time a race thread comes up, someone invariably comes in to argue the definition of RACE.

According to Webster's:

1. A local geographic or global human population distinguished as a more or less distinct group by genetically transmitted physical characteristics.
2. A group of people united or classified together on the basis of common history, nationality, or geographic distribution: the German race.
3. A genealogical line; a lineage.
4. Humans considered as a group.
5. Biology.
A. An interbreeding, usually geographically isolated population of organisms differing from other populations of the same species in the frequency of
hereditary traits. A race that has been given formal taxonomic recognition is known as a subspecies.
B. A breed or strain, as of domestic animals.
6. A distinguishing or characteristic quality, such as the flavor of a wine

AND

race

\Race\, n. [F. race; cf. Pr. & Sp. raza, It. razza; all from OHG. reiza line, akin to E. write. See Write.] 1. The descendants of a common ancestor; a family, tribe, people, or nation, believed or presumed to belong to the same stock; a lineage; a breed.

The whole race of mankind. --Shak.

Whence the long race of Alban fathers come. --Dryden.

Note: Naturalists and ehnographers divide mankind into several distinct varieties, or races. Cuvier refers them all to three, Pritchard enumerates seven, Agassiz eight, Pickering describes eleven. One of the common classifications is that of Blumenbach, who makes five races: the Caucasian, or white race, to which belong the greater part of the European nations and those of Western Asia; the Mongolian, or yellow race, occupying Tartary, China, Japan, etc.; the Ethiopian, or negro race, occupying most of Africa (except the north), Australia, Papua, and other Pacific Islands; the American, or red race, comprising the Indians of North and South America; and the Malayan, or brown race, which occupies the islands of the Indian Archipelago, etc. Many recent writers classify the Malay and American races as branches of the Mongolian. See Illustration in Appendix


SO, contrary to the opinions of SOME, the definition of RACE is not that concrete.
 
i should scan the article in my Anthropology book. it's a very good argument that confirms race is JUST A MYTH made up by Europeans (and Americans?) as a way to classify people. if i remember i will scan the article. it's a GREAT read and really changes your perspective on things 🙂
 
SO, contrary to the opinions of SOME, the definition of RACE is not that concrete.
Never was and as the world globalized more and "interracial" or cross-cultural marriages are becoming more common, it'll eventually (hopefully) be an abandoned term.

Nationality and country of citizenship. Much better way to classify, imo.
 
Originally posted by: hdeck
i should scan the article in my Anthropology book. it's a very good argument that confirms race is JUST A MYTH made up by Europeans (and Americans?) as a way to classify people. if i remember i will scan the article. it's a GREAT read and really changes your perspective on things 🙂

actually, that's nonsense unless you define what you mean by Race first. If race is just a collection of tribes, than it isn't a myth but just another level.

one of the definitions that webster used was descendants of a particular person, descendants of abraham for eg.

so unless you define what you mean by race you can't just dismiss it.

are "blacks" different from "whites"?? is that the definition of race, skin color?? then where to Indians/Pakistanis fit in?? Do you go by facial features??

Or is it a definition of language and culture??
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Don't forget that we and the chimps are the same species too.

No we aren't. WTH kind of biology are you studying?

BTW: No such thing as race. Race is an artificial term for an artificial distinction. Ethnicity is probably a better term to describe what most people think of race. The physical differences between so called "races" are non issues on a genetic level.
 
Of course we are. There are mice classified in the same species that differ by 10% genetically. We are 98+ percent genitically identical to chimps. If aliens were doing the classification instead of egotistical humans, we and the chimps would be in the same species. And, of course, we can breed with them, or didn't you know. 😀
 
Originally posted by: hdeck
i should scan the article in my Anthropology book. it's a very good argument that confirms race is JUST A MYTH made up by Europeans (and Americans?) as a way to classify people. if i remember i will scan the article. it's a GREAT read and really changes your perspective on things 🙂

This is true. There is more distinction within "races" than between.
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Of course we are. There are mice classified in the same species that differ by 10% genetically. We are 98+ percent genitically identical to chimps. If aliens were doing the classification instead of egotistical humans, we and the chimps would be in the same species. And, of course, we can breed with them, or didn't you know. 😀

where i work they create & use Humsters - human/hamster hybrids.
 
Back
Top