Re: New uses of "race"

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: karl h schwerin: "A new PC category?"
• Previous message: ERIC SILVERMAN: "electronic HRAF"

On Mon, 9 Oct 1995, Jay Kotliar wrote:

> While I agree with Dwight's points about race as 1. a social construct, and
> 2. its possible use as a referential biological construct varying to
> distinguish between various populations and groups with particular allele
> frequencies etc. I think that the using the word race to describe these
> clusters would not be in the interest of the profession.
> I would recommend that biological and physical anthropologists not use
> the word race to these very admirable ends, as the word has too much baggage
> associated and will tend to confuse rather than illuminate. Rather than
> trying to rehabilitate it, I think we should abandon it completely and use
> terms that we don't have to be defensive about. Just a thought.
>
I agree. Maybe in a different time and world we can use the term race,
but in today's world, it causes hysteria and confusion. In fact the term
we use in one of my classes is biological affinity which is a much better
term.
Jennifer

• Next message: karl h schwerin: "A new PC category?"
• Previous message: ERIC SILVERMAN: "electronic HRAF"