DOCSLIB.ORG

Download Paper

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Download Paper Book. Submitted to Open Behavioral Genetics December 25, 2014 Published in Open Behavioral Genetics June 20, 2015 The Nature of Race: the Genealogy of the Concept and the Biological Construct's Contemporaneous Utility John Fuerst1 Abstract: Racial constructionists, anti-naturalists, and anti-realists have challenged users of the biological race concept to provide and defend, from the perspective of biology, biological philosophy, and ethics, a biologically informed concept of race. In this paper, an onto- epistemology of biology is developed. What it is, by this, to be "biological real" and "biologically meaningful" and to represent a "biological natural division" is explained. Early 18th century race concepts are discussed in detail and are shown to be both sensible and not greatly dissimilar to modern concepts. A general biological race concept (GBRC) is developed. It is explained what the GBRC does and does not entail and how this concept unifies the plethora of specific ones, past and present. Other race concepts as developed in the philosophical literature are discussed in relation to the GBRC. The sense in which races are both real and natural is explained. Racial essentialism of the relational sort is shown to be coherent. Next, the GBRC is discussed in relation to anthropological discourse. Traditional human racial classifications are defended from common criticisms: historical incoherence, arbitrariness, cluster discordance, etc. Whether or not these traditional human races could qualify as taxa subspecies – or even species – is considered. It is argued that they could qualify as taxa subspecies by liberal readings of conventional standards. Further, it is pointed out that some species concepts potentially allow certain human populations to be designated as species. It is explained why, by conventional population genetic and statistical standards, genetic differences between major human racial groups are at least moderate. Behavioral genetic differences associated with human races are discussed in general and in specific. The matter of race differences in cognitive ability is briefly considered. Finally, the race concept is defended from various criticisms. First, logical and empirical critiques are dissected. These include: biological scientific, sociological, ontological, onto-epistemological, semantic, and teleological arguments. None are found to have any merit. Second, moral-based arguments are investigated in context to a general ethical frame and are counter-critiqued. Racial inequality, racial nepotism, and the “Racial Worldview" are discussed. What is dubbed the Anti-Racial Worldview is rejected on both empirical and moral grounds. Finally, an area of future investigation – the politics of the destruction of the race concept – is pointed to. Keywords: natural division, race, biology 11Corresponding author: [email protected] 1 Contents Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………..4 I. Biology – A Philosophical Clarification……………………………………….………………..5 I-A. Existing Views: Confusions Abound I-B. Biological Concepts in General I-C. The Validity of Biological Concepts I-D. Biological Kinds I-E. Natural Biological Divisions I-F. Races as Natural Biological Divisions I-G. The Intraspecific Natural Division as Type of Biological Variation I-H. The Natural Division as a Taxonomic Unit I-I. Natural Divisions and Intraspecific Variation with Regards to the Subspecies Category I-J. Biologically Meaningful Race Concepts I-K. Biological Reality I-L. Biologically Important Differences I-M. Concepts of Biological Race II. The General Biological Race Concept………………………………………………………..25 II-A. The Genealogy of the Concept II-B. Semantic Complexities and the Evolution of the Race Concept II-C. Biological Race II-D. What the Core Biological Race Concept Does Not represent II-E. Races, Clines, Clusters? II-F. Clarification on the Meaning of "Arbitrary" and "Objective" in Context to Natural Divisions II-G. Regarding Different Definitions of Biological Race: What Races Need Not Be II-H. Genomic-Genealogical Complications II-I. Estimated Genomic Similarity: Some Ambiguity II-J. Race: Mixed and Undifferentiated II-K. Essential and Cluster classes; Fuzzy and Discrete Sets II-L. Sociological Clarifications III. The Ontology of Biological Race……………………………………………………………62 III-A. Other Defenses of Biological Race III-B. Biological Races and Biological Reality III-C. Thin Biological Racial Essentialism IV. The Races of Man…………………………………………………........................................81 IV-A. A Very Brief Historical Review IV-B. Human Biological Races and Scientific Consensus IV-C. Racial Classifications and Biological Race Concepts IV-D. Traditional human Races IV-E. THRs and Biologically Objective Races IV-F. THRs and Migration, Intermixing, and Ancient Admixture IV-G. THRs and Cluster Discordance 2 IV-H. THRs and Taxonomy IV-I. THRs and Subspecies IV-J. Are There Human Species? IV-K. "Significant" Racial Differences IV-L. Human Biodiversity (HBD) and Society IV-M. Race and Intelligence V. Critique of Anti-Biological Race Arguments……………………………………………….126 V-A. Anti-Biological Arguments V-B. Biological Scientific Arguments V-C. Sociological Arguments V-D. Unnaturalistic Arguments and the Numbers Game V-E. Onto-epistemology Arguments V-F. Semantic Arguments V-G. No-True-Race Arguments V-H. Teleological Argument: The Future of Race V.I. Can a Good Argument be Made Against (the) Race (concept)? VI. A Troublesome Inheritance?..................................................................................................148 VI-A. The Social Destruction of a Biological Reality VI-B. A Not So New Morality for Race VI-C. The Moral Critiques: Arguments based on Outcome Differences VI-D. The Moral Critiques: Arguments based on Racial Classification and Identity VI-E. The Moral Critiques: Arguments based on Racial Favoritism VI-F. The Moral Critiques: Arguments based on the “Racial Worldview” Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………...169 References……………………………………………………………………………………...170 Fragaria virginiana ssp. virginiana & Fragaria virginiana ssp. grayana (Britton and Brown, 1913) 3 The task for race naturalists, then, is to develop a “biologically informed but non-essentialist concept of race”[.] – Hochman (2013) Introduction It is frequently asserted: firstly, that the word “race” is meaningless; secondly, that races are not, biologically speaking, real; thirdly, that while there do exist biological races in other animal species, there are none in ours; and finally, that any biological differences between the human races are meaningless in the grand scheme of things. It is infrequently acknowledged that the first through fourth statements can not all be true at the same time: if "race" is meaningless, it makes no sense to say that it is non-biological; if it is non- biological, it can not exist in nonhuman animals; and so on and so forth. Nevertheless, these four contrary claims, individually flawed as they are, are thought by many to constitute, in composite, an ironclad argument against any attempt to characterize certain divisions of Homo sapiens as biological races. (Presumably it is not yet considered ‘scientifically racist' to study biodiversity in other animal species, though we can not be sure. 2) There is, of course, an element of truth to all four of the stated claims: the word “race” indeed has no unique definition; anyone can deem that whatever genetically based differences exist between human populations are unimportant; there are race concepts which are fundamentally non-biological; and there are biological race concepts (frequently made of straw) by which there are no human biological races. All of this is true, and rather trivial, but since the statements are so often taken to mean something true and nontrivial – that there is no robust sense in which human biological races exist - we feel compelled to provide a precise conceptual framework for biological race. 2We use single quotes to signify that a term is unclear; some of the quoted passages, however, use double quotes to signify the same. We use double quotes to call to attention that we are referring to a term, not a concept. 4 Still, in the same way as we classify races and degenerations of horses and poultry, of pinks and tulips, so also, in addition, must we classify the varieties of mankind. – Blumenbach (1806) I. Biology – A Philosophical Clarification I-A. Existing Views: Confusions Abound We must start by carving out a conceptual space for biologically real race. Regarding the panoply of existing views on race (and its biological reality, if any), we must confess to deep confusion. The least bewildering account may be that of philosopher Quayshawn Spencer (2012), which we quote simply to give a sense of the depths into which we are getting: Historically, “biological racial realism” has been interpreted in either one of two ways. One is “race is a natural kind in biology,” and the second is “race is a real biological kind.” However, race theorists adopt at least four different views about what a natural kind is. Let me begin with the natural kind views. First, some race theorists – such as Anthony Appiah (1996, 40), Robin Andreasen (2000, S655- S657), and Naomi Zack (2002, 4) – define a natural kind as an objectively real kind. A paradigm example is Andreasen’s view. According to Andreasen (2000, S655), race must be a “natural kind” in order to be biologically real… Second, some race theorists – such as Edouard Machery (2005, 446) and Glasgow (2009, 81) – define a natural
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Survey of Expert Opinion on Intelligence Intelligence Research
    Intelligence 78 (2020) 101406 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Intelligence journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/intell Survey of expert opinion on intelligence: Intelligence research, experts' T background, controversial issues, and the media ⁎ Heiner Rindermanna, , David Beckera, Thomas R. Coyleb a Department of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Wilhelm-Raabe-Str. 43, D-09107 Chemnitz, Germany b Department of Psychology, University of Texas at San Antonio, One UTSA Circle, San Antonio, TX 78249, USA ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT Keywords: Experts (Nmax = 102 answering) on intelligence completed a survey about IQ research, controversies, and the Expert survey media. The survey was conducted in 2013 and 2014 using the Internet-based Expert Questionnaire on Cognitive Intelligence Ability (EQCA). In the current study, we examined the background of the experts (e.g., nationality, gender, IQ-tests religion, and political orientation) and their positions on intelligence research, controversial issues, and the Media media. Most experts were male (83%) and from Western countries (90%). Political affiliations ranged from the Worldviews left (liberal, 54%) to the right (conservative, 24%), with more extreme responses within the left-liberal spectrum. Experts rated the media and public debates as far below adequate. Experts with a left (liberal, progressive) political orientation were more likely to have positive views of the media (around r = |.30|). In contrast, compared to female and left (liberal) experts, male and right (conservative) experts were more likely to endorse the validity of IQ testing (correlations with gender, politics: r = .55, .41), the g factor theory of intelligence (r = .18, .34), and the impact of genes on US Black-White differences (r = .50, .48).
    [Show full text]
  • Independent Report to the Governing Body 30 April 2019
    St. Edmund’s College in the University of Cambridge EXTERNAL INVESTIGATION INTO THE APPOINTMENT OF THE TOBY JACKMAN NEWTON TRUST RESEARCH FELLOW Independent Report to the Governing Body Sir Patrick Elias, External Investigator 30 April 2019 THIS REPORT HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR, AND IS THE PROPRIETARY INFORMATION OF, THE GOVERNING BODY OF ST. EDMUND’S COLLEGE. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REDACTED VERSION FOR DISCLOSURE IN RESPONSE TO REQUESTS MADE UNDER THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT 2000 Introduction 1. Dr. Noah Carl was elected to the Toby Jackman Newton Trust Research Fellowship at St. Edmund’s College in the University of Cambridge (the “College”). It has subsequently been alleged by the Combination Room (i.e. the College’s student body) that the nature and subject matter of his research, his methodology, as well as his close association with persons with allegedly racist views, make him unfit to remain in that post. The Combination Room has also complained that in view of these matters, the Master and Fellows who were responsible for his appointment ought never to have appointed him and were in dereliction of their duty in doing so. In substance their complaint is that either the relevant Fellows knew of the matters which ought to have rendered Dr. Carl unsuitable but recommended his appointment nonetheless, or they did not know about them when they ought to have done. If the former is correct, it puts into question what the students have described as the “ethical framework and integrity and moral framework of several members of the Fellowship;” if the latter, it involves a different allegation, namely that the relevant Fellows were incompetent and failed to conduct proper due diligence before recommending Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Chloroform, Consent…They’Re Both the Same Thing, Right?
    (/) (https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula) ! Sidebar Menu « Most accurate description of the current state of The right take the internet ever (https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2018/01/10/the- (https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2018/01/10/most- right-take/) » accurate-description-of-the-current-state-of-the- internet-ever/) Chloroform, consent…they’re both the same thing, right? keep getting told by ignorant regressives that our universities exclude radical and conservative ideas — that somehow, these IIinstitutions that value the free exchange of ideas so much that they have this thing called “tenure” to protect people who say stuff offensive to conventionality are actually dedicated to concealing the True Facts, whatever they may be, that can only be seen by Classical Liberals and Libertarians who have the clear sight. It’s all nonsense. I’ve been to creationist talks on college campuses — it’s fairly routine, and that bullshit is about as openly counterfactual as you can get. Milo Yiannopoulos spoke at the University of Minnesota last year, and that bozo is creepy and wrong, but he got to babble in a university facility. Heck, I’ve spoken on university campuses all around the country, and you all know what a wacko I am. It takes being truly violent or hateful to get yourself booted off of a campus. So I am not surprised that University College London hosted a eugenics conference (http://londonstudent.coop/news/2018/01/10/exposed-london-eugenics-conferences-neo-nazi-links/) now. In the 21st century. In one of the most cosmopolitan cities in the world. Even though they’re mainly reduced to preaching at churches nowadays, the Discovery Institute is still having an event at Seattle Pacific University in March (http://www.discovery.org/moreEvents.php).
    [Show full text]
  • London's Eugenics Conference and Its Neo-Nazi Links
    # $ Exposed: London’s eugenics conference and its neo-Nazi links Ben Van Der Merwe ! 10th January 2018 " 7 min read A eugenics conference held annually at University College London by an honorary professor, the London Conference on Intelligence, is dominated by a secretive group of white supremacists with neo-Nazi links, London Student can exclusively reveal. Content note: This article contains references to racism, anti-Semitism and child abuse. The conference has taken place at UCL four times since its inception in 2014, and now even boasts its own YouTube channel bearing the UCL logo. UCL have told London Student that they are investigating the conference. A spokesperson said: “We are an institution that is committed to free speech but also to combatting racism and sexism in all forms.” UCL professor David Colquhoun expressed disbelief that the university would host such “pseudoscience” and stated that the organiser, Professor James Thompson, “clearly doesn’t understand genetics.” “The actual genetic difference between humans, with respect to race or sex, is absolutely miniscule compared to what they have in common,” he told London Student. Among the speakers and attendees over the last four years are a self-taught geneticist who argues in favour of child rape, multiple white supremacists, and ex-board member of the Office for Students Toby Young. A central figure in the London Conference on Intelligence (LCI) is the white nationalist, extremist Richard Lynn, who has called for the “phasing out” of the “populations of incompetent cultures.” Lynn, who is President of the Ulster Institute for Social Research (UISR), spoke at the conference 2015 and 2016, along with four of the six members of the UISR’s Academic Advisory Council.
    [Show full text]
  • Admixture in the Americas: Regional and National Differences
    MANKIND QUARTERLY 2016 56:3 255-373 Admixture in the Americas: Regional and National Differences John Fuerst, Emil O. W. Kirkegaard1 We conducted novel analyses regarding the association between continental racial ancestry, cognitive ability and socioeconomic outcomes across 6 datasets: states of Mexico, states of the United States, states of Brazil, departments of Colombia, sovereign nations and all units together. We find that European ancestry is consistently and usually strongly positively correlated with cognitive ability and socioeconomic outcomes (mean r for cognitive ability = .708; for socioeconomic well-being = .643) (Sections 3-8). In most cases, including another ancestry component, in addition to European ancestry, did not increase predictive power (Section 9). At the national level, the association between European ancestry and outcomes was robust to controls for natural-environmental factors (Section 10). This was not always the case at the regional level (Section 18). It was found that genetic distance did not have predictive power independent of European ancestry (Section 10). Automatic modeling using best subset selection and lasso regression agreed in most cases that European ancestry was a non-redundant predictor (Section 11). Results were robust across 4 different ways of weighting the analyses (Section 12). It was found that the effect of European ancestry on socioeconomic outcomes was mostly mediated by cognitive ability (Section 13). We failed to find evidence of international colorism or culturalism (i.e., neither skin reflectance nor self-reported race/ethnicity showed incremental predictive ability once genomic ancestry had been taken into account) (Section 14). The association between European ancestry and cognitive outcomes was robust across a number of alternative measures of cognitive ability (Section 15).
    [Show full text]
  • Net Fiscal Contributions of Immigrant Groups in Denmark and Finland Are
    Submitted: 24th of April 2017 Published: 21st of May 2017 Net fiscal contributions of immigrant groups in Denmark and Finland are highly predictable from country of origin IQ and Muslim % Emil O. W. Kirkegaard* Open Quantitative Sociology & Political Science Abstract The relationships between national IQs, Muslim % in origin countries and estimates of net fiscal contributions to public finances in Denmark (n=32) and Finland (n=11) were examined. The analyses showed that the fiscal estimates were near-perfectly correlated between countries (r = .89 [.56 to .98], n=9), and were well-predicted by national IQs (r’s .89 [.49 to .96] and .69 [.45 to .84]), and Muslim % (r’s -.75 [-.93 to -.27] and -.73 [-.86 to -.51]). Furthermore, general socioeconomic factor scores for Denmark were near-perfectly correlated with the fiscal estimates (r = .86 [.74 to .93]), especially when one outlier (Syria) was excluded (.90 [.80 to .95]). Finally, the monetary returns to higher country of origin IQs were estimated to be 917/470 Euros/person-year for a 1 IQ point increase, and -188/-86 for a 1 % increase in Muslim %. Keywords: immigration, country of origin, national IQ, IQ, intelligence, cognitive ability, Muslims, Islam, public finances, inequality 1 Introduction data types are harder to find than others. Still, it has generally been found that two key characteristics of origin countries predict immigrant performance: na- A number of recent studies have shown that coun- try of origin characteristics are moderately to very tional IQ and Muslim % (the percentage of Muslims predictive of immigrant group performance, broadly in the population).
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights
    Running head: Human rights May 4, 2017 Human rights: Why countries differ Heiner Rindermann Department of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology, Germany Noah Carl Nuffield College, Oxford University, United Kingdom Preprint, draft. Revised published: Rindermann, H. & Carl, N. (2018). Human rights: Why countries differ. Comparative Sociology, 17, 29-69. DOI: 10.1163/15691330-12341451 http://booksandjournals.brillonline.com/content/journals/10.1163/15691330- 12341451 Addresses Prof. Dr. Heiner Rindermann [corresponding author] Department of Psychology, Chemnitz University of Technology Wilhelm-Raabe-Str. 43, D-09107 Chemnitz, Germany E-mail: [email protected] Tel. +49 371 531 38715, Fax +49 371 531 838715 Noah Carl Nuffield College, Oxford University New Road, Oxford OX11NF, United Kingdom E-mail: [email protected] Human rights Abstract Countries differ considerably in their respect for and political recognition of human rights. Using the cross-country CIRI data (Cingranelli & Richards; N = 74 to 191 countries), we tested two main theories: First, the cognitive-moral enlightenment theory going back to Piaget and Socrates postulates that individuals and nations with higher levels of cognitive ability think and behave in a way more conducive to human rights. Second, the culture-religion theory going back to Weber, Sombart and Voltaire postulates that different religious beliefs shape attitudes, and propel societies toward institutions that are more or less supportive of human rights. Two measures of cognitive ability were utilized: the average level of cognitive ability within society, and the level within the society’s intellectual class. Two measures of religious belief were also utilized: percentage of Christians, and percentage of Muslims.
    [Show full text]
  • Apparitions in the Theory: How the Sciences Cause Race and Gender to Matter in the Twenty- First Century Antwann Michael Simpkins
    UC Irvine Law Review Volume 9 Article 7 Issue 5 Women, Law, Society, & Technology 7-2019 Apparitions in the Theory: How the Sciences Cause Race and Gender to Matter in the Twenty- first Century Antwann Michael Simpkins Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucilr Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Antwann Michael Simpkins, Apparitions in the Theory: How the Sciences Cause Race and Gender to Matter in the Twenty-first Century, 9 U.C. Irvine L. Rev. 1217 (2019). Available at: https://scholarship.law.uci.edu/ucilr/vol9/iss5/7 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UCI Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in UC Irvine Law Review by an authorized editor of UCI Law Scholarly Commons. Final to Printer_Simpkins (Do Not Delete) 7/22/2019 7:52 PM Apparitions in the Theory: How the Sciences Cause Race and Gender to Matter in the Twenty-first Century Antwann Michael Simpkins* A. Scientific Inquiry ...................................................................................................... 12 21 B. “To Use Neuroimaging Techniques” ................................................................... 1227 C. The Science of Law .................................................................................................. 1232 How was I to know that racism and sexism had formed a blueprint for my mistreatment long before I got here? As with most black women, others’ hatred of me became self-hatred, which has diminished over the years, but has by no means disappeared.1
    [Show full text]
  • Net Opposition to Immigrants of Different Nationalities
    Submitted: 9th of October 2016 DOI: 10.26775/OQSPS.2016.11.10 Published: 10th of November 2016 ISSN: 2446-3868 Net Opposition To Immigrants Of Different Nationalities Correlates Strongly With Their Arrest Rates In The UK Noah Carl! Open Quantitative Sociology & Political Science Abstract Public beliefs about immigrants and immigration are widely regarded as erroneous. For example, members of the public typically overestimate the immigrant fraction of the population by 10–15 percentage points. On the other hand, consen- ∼ sual stereotypes about the respective characteristics of different groups (e.g., sexes, races, nationalities) are generally found to be quite accurate. The present study shows that, in the UK, net opposition to immigrants of different nationalities (n = 23) correlates strongly with the log of immigrant arrests rates (r = .69; p = 0.0003; 95 % CI = [.39, .86]) and with the log of their arrest rates for violent crime (r = .68; p = 0.0003; 95 % CI = [.38, .85]). This is particularly noteworthy given that Britons reportedly think that an immigrant’s criminal history should be one of the most important characteristics when considering whether he or she should be allowed into the country. In bivariate models, the associations are not wholly accounted for by a general opposition to non-Whites, non-Westerners, foreigners who do not speak English, Muslims, or those from countries with low average IQ. While circumstantial in nature, the study’s findings suggest that public beliefs about the relative positions of different immigrant groups may be reasonably accurate. Keywords: Immigrants, attitudes, stereotypes, arrest rates, crime 1 Introduction of different groups (e.g., sexes, races, nationalities) are generally quite accurate (Jussim et al., 2015).
    [Show full text]