Re: Race (primary definition)

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: James Howard: "Race (primary definition)"
• Previous message: Elijah: "His excellent reply: trimming headers (to stop crossposting)"
• Maybe in reply to: James Howard: "Race (primary definition)"
• Next in thread: Matt Silberstein: "Re: Race (primary definition)"

In article <56k8tv$2is@lal.interserv.com>, phis@sprynet.com (James Howard)
wrote:

> Since the human genome is, essentially, shared by all, I suggest the
differences in race result from differences in gene expression. I suggest
testosterone is the molecule that causes major differences in gene
expression, that result in the differences described as "race." Humans
and chimpanzees exhibit major differences in testosterone; human "races"
exhibit major differences in testosterone. Changes in testosterone, along
with only slight differences in genes, will produce the appearance of
different species of hominids over time.
> James Howard

I often wonder why the race concept survives among academics. I suspect
that its utility in popular culture derives from its ability to serve as a
"hot button," but shouldn't the academy be beyond that point?

Why do we continue to use "race" to describe human biology? Does the
concept still carry objective value? Is there a WORKING definition of
race?

-- 

Shamelessly self-promoting

http://home.earthlink.net/~resolute

• Next message: James Howard: "Race (primary definition)"
• Previous message: Elijah: "His excellent reply: trimming headers (to stop crossposting)"
• Maybe in reply to: James Howard: "Race (primary definition)"
• Next in thread: Matt Silberstein: "Re: Race (primary definition)"