|
|
Re: Race, Head Size, And IQSS51000 (SS51@NEMOMUS.BITNET)Thu, 20 Oct 1994 12:40:53 CST
produces, zoologists around 1950--led partly by E.O. Wilson of all people, already were growing quite skeptical of the clarity with which subspecies could be identified. Thanks to R. Wilk for posting the statistic that about half of contemporary biological anthropologists have gotten the message. As R. Quinlan noted, this recommends clinal analysis rather than racial pigeonholing (about which scientific agreement proved impossible). I think scientists who use race as an independent biological variable need to give an operational definition of race as a biological trait measurable with some degree of validity and reliability. Symbolic logician Stephen Pollard mentioned to me that if we socially defined the "white race" the way we socially define the "black race," the starting line-up of the Duke basketball team recently would all "be" not black but white. That is, if, instead of a single dark-skinned African ancestor making one "black," a single light-skinned European ancestor made one "white." By the way: when anthro-l went around on race last year, the question came up, Were the ancient Egyptians really black? My honest question, I believe, received no answer: Are today's Egyptians *really black*? --Bob Graber
|