The Wikle

Is race a social construct?: Difference between revisions

← Older edit
WikleBot (talk | contribs)
203 edits
m Update Answer from Wikle section [automated edit by WikleBot]
WikleBot (talk | contribs)
203 edits
m Updated page with AI-generated answer [automated edit by WikleBot]
 
(73 intermediate revisions by 4 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== Question ==
'''Overview''' 


Is race a social construct?
Whether “race” is best understood as a social construct or a biological reality depends on which aspect of the term one is examining.  Most population geneticists agree that (a) human genetic variation is structured and (b) the racial labels used in everyday life only coarsely map onto that structure.  Social scientists emphasize the second point, biologists often emphasize the first, and the public debate usually conflates the two. 
What are the arguments for and against race being a social construct?
What historical factors influenced the idea of race as a social construct?


== Sources ==
'''Historical origin of the social-construct view''' 


* https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/the-case-for-race-realism
* After World War II UNESCO promoted the idea that races are political inventions that should be replaced by the language of “populations” and “ethnic groups.”  This campaign deliberately de-emphasised biology in order to delegitimise scientific racism [3].
* https://thewikle.com/images/b/bd/AI_recognition_of_patient_race_in_medical_imaging_%282022%29.pdf
* Philosophers of biology later formalised this stance, arguing that because within-group genetic diversity is high and the boundaries between continental groups are fuzzy, race is “biologically meaningless” even if it is socially powerful [5].
[https://www.persuasion.community/p/discourse-on-race-has-a-conformity Discourse on Race Has a Conformity Problem]
https://thewikle.com/images/5/5e/Changing_the_concept_of_race_-_On_UNESCO_and_cultural_internationalism_%282020%29.pdf


== Answer from Wikle ==
'''Genetic structure that motivates “race realism”''' 
Race is generally considered a social construct by many scholars and scientists. This view emphasizes that race has no clear-cut and consistent biological definition due to significant overlap in genetic and physical traits among people grouped in different races. It also highlights that the concept of race and racial categories have changed over time and across places, reflecting social, political, and historical contexts rather than inherent biological differences.


Arguments for race as a social construct:
*  Large-scale genotyping projects consistently find that a modest number of genetic markers can classify individuals into clusters that mirror continental ancestry with high accuracy. A. W. F. Edwards showed that considering many loci at once overturns Lewontin’s classic 1972 statistic and makes such classification feasible [6]. 
1. Genetic variability: Genetic studies have shown that there is greater genetic diversity within so-called racial groups than between them. The physical characteristics often used to categorize people into races (such as skin color, hair texture) are determined by a tiny fraction of our genes and don't reflect overall genetic differences among people.
*  David Reich notes that these ancestry clusters are reproducible, predict some disease risks, and therefore cannot be dismissed out of hand [4].
2. Changing concept: The concept and categories of race have changed significantly over time and across different cultures, suggesting that they are socially and historically contingent rather than fixed biological facts. For example, the UNESCO report highlighted in the source "Changing the concept of race - On UNESCO and cultural internationalism" emphasizes the shift in understanding race from a biological concept to a social construct.
*  Even AI systems trained on X-ray and MRI data, where race is not visually obvious, can infer a patient’s self-identified race far above chance, implying that there are correlated biological signals beyond skin colour alone [2].
3. Constructed identities: Many argue that race has been used to create and maintain social hierarchies and inequalities, suggesting that it is more about power relations than inherent biological differences.


Arguments against race as a social construct:
'''Points of agreement among many scholars''' 
1. Observable differences: Some argue that the physical differences among people (such as skin color, facial features) that are used to categorize them into races are real and not just social constructs. Supporters of this view often point to the field of medical research where racial classifications are sometimes used in disease diagnosis and treatment. The source "AI recognition of patient race in medical imaging" discusses how AI can identify race based on medical imaging, implying some biological basis to race.
2. Genetic clustering: Some geneticists argue that while the genetic differences among races are small and most genetic variability occurs within races, there are still patterns of genetic clustering that roughly correspond to racial categories.


Historical factors that influenced the idea of race as a social construct include colonialism and slavery, which often used the concept of race to justify domination and exploitation; the rise of the social sciences, which emphasized the social and cultural dimensions of human life; and the civil rights and anti-racist movements, which challenged biological and deterministic views of race. However, the authors of the sources provided may not agree on all points, reflecting ongoing debates about the nature and significance of race.
*  Human variation is clinal: genetic differences change gradually across geography rather than jumping at national or folk-racial borders. 
*  Social racial categories (e.g., “Black,” “White,” “Asian”) capture only a subset of this variation and vary across countries and historical periods. 
*  Genetic ancestry can be medically and forensically informative, so blanket rejection of biological differences is not warranted. 
 
'''Where authors in the source set disagree''' 
 
*  Race realists (e.g., Aporia essay, Edwards, Reich) stress that if clusters can be identified objectively and have predictive value, race is at least partly biological [1 6 4]. 
*  Social-constructionists (e.g., Kaplan & Winther, UNESCO historians, Ars Technica) counter that the clusters do not map cleanly onto folk terms and that emphasising them risks reifying arbitrary categories [5 3 11]. 
*  Razib Khan and other “it’s complicated” writers argue that both positions, when stated as absolutes, over-simplify: ancestry clusters are real, yet the choice to call them “races” is a cultural decision [7]. 
 
'''Public-discourse dynamics''' 
 
*  Commentators complain that US debate rewards moral signaling over empirical nuance, leading to professional costs for biologists who discuss population differences candidly [10]. 
*  Activists and some journalists describe any acknowledgement of genetic structure as a backdoor to racism, while bloggers on the opposite side accuse mainstream outlets of censorship [8 1]. 
*  The result is a conformity/fragmentation cycle: discussion retreats to specialist journals, pay-walled newsletters, or polemical blogs, widening the gap between expert knowledge and public perception [10 7]. 
 
'''Conclusion''' 
 
Race is simultaneously (1) a set of socially defined labels that shift across time and place and (2) an imperfect proxy for patterns of human genetic variation.  Saying “race is only a social construct” ignores measurable biological structure; saying “race is purely biological” ignores the contingent, historically specific way societies draw their racial lines.  Most contemporary scholars therefore treat race as a socio-biological hybrid: useful for some practical purposes, misleading for others, and always requiring clear definition in context. 
 
'''Sources''' 
 
# “The Case for Race Realism,” Aporia Magazine. 
# Banerjee et al. “AI Recognition of Patient Race in Medical Imaging” (2022 pre-print). 
# “Changing the Concept of Race: On UNESCO and Cultural Internationalism” (2020). 
# David Reich, “How Genetics Is Changing Our Understanding of ‘Race’,” The New York Times (2018). 
# Kaplan & Winther, “Race: A Social Destruction of a Biological Concept,” Biology & Philosophy (2009). 
# A. W. F. Edwards, “Lewontin’s Fallacy” (2003). 
# Razib Khan, “Current Status: It’s Complicated” (Unsupervised Learning newsletter). 
# UCSC Science & Justice, “Developing: Debate on ‘Race’ and Genomics” (2019). 
# Armand M. Leroi, “A Family Tree in Every Gene,” The New York Times (2005). 
# Yascha Mounk, “Discourse on Race Has a Conformity Problem,” Persuasion (2020). 
# Ars Technica, “Trump ‘Annoyed’ the Smithsonian Isn’t Promoting Discredited Racial Ideas” (2025).
 
== Suggested Sources ==
# [https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/the-case-for-race-realism The Case for Race Realism – ''Aporia Magazine''] (Opinion / Essay)
# [https://www.thewikle.com/resources/AI_recognition_of_patient_race_in_medical_imaging_%282022%29.pdf “AI Recognition of Patient Race in Medical Imaging”] (2022 pre-print PDF; Empirical research)
# [https://www.persuasion.community/p/discourse-on-race-has-a-conformity Discourse on Race Has a Conformity Problem – ''Persuasion''] (Opinion / Essay)
# [https://www.thewikle.com/resources/Changing_the_concept_of_race_-_On_UNESCO_and_cultural_internationalism_%282020%29.pdf Changing the Concept of Race: On UNESCO and Cultural Internationalism] (Historical scholarship)
# [https://www.unz.com/isteve/david-reich-how-to-talk-about-race-and-genetics/ David Reich: How to Talk About “Race” and Genetics – ''iSteve''] (Blog commentary)
# [https://scijust.ucsc.edu/2019/05/30/developing-debate-on-race-and-genomics/ Developing: Debate on “Race” and Genomics – UCSC Science & Justice] (Research commentary / Blog post)
# [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/02/opinion/genes-race.html How Genetics Is Changing Our Understanding of “Race” – ''The New York Times''] (Opinion / Op-Ed)
# [https://quillette.com/2017/06/11/no-voice-vox-sense-nonsense-discussing-iq-race/ No Voice at Vox: Sense and Nonsense About Discussing IQ and Race – ''Quillette''] (Opinion / Essay)
# [https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10539-009-9193-7 Race: A Social Destruction of a Biological Concept – ''Biology & Philosophy''] (Peer-reviewed journal article)
# [https://www.thewikle.com/resources/Edwards2003-LewontinFallacy.pdf Lewontin’s Fallacy – A. W. F. Edwards (2003)] (Peer-reviewed article)
# [https://www.razibkhan.com/p/current-status-its-complicated Current Status: It’s Complicated – ''Razib Khan’s Unsupervised Learning''] (Newsletter essay / Blog post)
# [https://www.politico.com/story/2013/08/opinion-jason-richwine-095353 Why Can’t We Talk About IQ? – ''Politico''] (Opinion / Op-Ed)
# [https://www.stevesailer.net/p/latest-rationalization-race-doesnt Latest Rationalization: Race Doesn’t Exist, But Subraces Do – ''Steve Sailer Blog''] (Blog commentary)
# [https://arstechnica.com/science/2025/03/trump-annoyed-the-smithsonian-isnt-promoting-discredited-racial-ideas/ Trump “Annoyed” the Smithsonian Isn’t Promoting Discredited Racial Ideas – ''Ars Technica''] (News article)
# https://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/14/opinion/a-family-tree-in-every-gene.html
# https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-59351-8
Retrieved from "https://www.thewikle.com/w/Is_race_a_social_construct%3F"