Race Social Construct: Difference between revisions

WikleBot (talk | contribs)
m Updated page with AI-generated answer [automated edit by WikleBot]
WikleBot (talk | contribs)
m Updated page with AI-generated answer [automated edit by WikleBot]
 
(28 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
= Race, Population Groups, and the Contemporary Debate  =
''Written by AI. Help improve this answer by adding to the sources section. When the sources section is updated this article will regenerate.''
— an overview for The Wikle —


== 1. Is race a social construct?   ==
'''Is race a social construct?'''


* Mainstream academic consensus since the mid-20th century holds that “race” is primarily a social category—created and maintained by historical power relations—rather than a discrete biological taxon [4][6].
Race is largely a social construct in that the labels, boundaries and meanings attached to human variation are produced by societies; yet measurable biological population structure also exists. Geneticists find that variation is clinal and overlapping, but multivariate methods can nevertheless cluster most people into broad continental groups that resemble folk-racial terms [10][1]. Whether one calls those clusters “races,” “ancestry groups” or something else is partly a matter of convention, so the answer depends on the definition one adopts.
* Geneticists, however, report that human genetic variation is not evenly distributed; geographically separated groups form partially distinct gene-frequency clusters that correlate with many traditional racial labels [1][5][9][10][11].
* Consequently, many scholars now say that race is ''both'' socially constructed ''and'' partially tracking real patterns of human biological variation. The controversy centres on how useful the term “race” is for describing those patterns [6][7].


== 2. Arguments for and against “race as social construct”  ==
'''Arguments for race being a social construct'''


{|class="wikitable"
* Classic racial taxonomies relied on a handful of visible traits and ignored most genetic variation; 85 % of that variation lies within, not between, conventional races [9].
|-
* Genetic differences change gradually with geography; the drawing of lines is therefore arbitrary and culturally contingent [7][6]
|Position
* Racial categories are historically fluid—e.g., U.S. census definitions have changed repeatedly—showing their social rather than biological origin [4].
|Core claims
* Modern ideas of race were entangled with colonialism, slavery and nation-building; their primary function was social placement, not scientific classification [4][3].
|Representative sources
|-
|SOCIAL CONSTRUCT
|• Biological variation is continuous and clinal, making hard racial boundaries arbitrary. <br>• Historical power dynamics (colonialism, slavery) produced the modern race concept. <br>• Most genetic diversity (≈ 85 %) lies within populations, not between them (“Lewontin’s 1972 result”).
|[4][6][7]
|-
|PARTIAL BIOLOGICAL REALISM
|• Clines ''cluster'': multivariate statistics (e.g., STRUCTURE, PCA) reliably recover ~5–7 continental ancestry groups that correspond to lay “races”. <br>• F_ST between continental groups (~0.12) is comparable with that between clearly recognised subspecies in other mammals. <br>• Medical AI systems can infer self-identified race from raw imaging data, indicating systematic biological signals [2].
|[1][5][9][10][11]
|-
|CONFLICTING VIEWS
|• Some authors emphasise political risks of biological race talk (e.g., misinterpretation, discrimination) [6], while others argue silencing the topic hinders scientific and medical progress [1][3][5].
|—
|}


== 3. Historical factors shaping the “social construct” view  ==
'''Arguments against the claim that race is only a social construct'''


* 18th–19th c.: Enlightenment naturalists (Linnaeus, Blumenbach) formally classify human “varieties” by continent, appearance, temperament.   
* Using hundreds of genetic loci, algorithms correctly assign continental ancestry with >95 % accuracy, indicating that some structure is real and detectable [10].   
* 1900-1930s: Eugenics movement links race taxonomy to social policy.   
* Medical AI systems infer a patient’s self-identified race from X-ray images that look identical to clinicians, suggesting systematic biological correlates of ancestry [2].   
* 1945-1950: Reaction to Nazi racial ideology prompts UNESCO statements (1950, 1951, 1967) declaring race lacks biological basis and is chiefly social [4].   
* Certain alleles (lactase persistence, APOL1, EDAR, EPAS1) differ markedly in frequency across regions; ignoring that structure can impair biomedical research [7][1].   
* 1972: Richard Lewontin’s seminal paper quantifies within- vs. between-group genetic variance, underpinning social-construct arguments. 
* Statistically defined clusters correspond well enough to everyday labels that discarding the term “race” can obscure communication about population genetics [1][10].
* 1990s: Human Genome Project popularises “we are 99.9 % the same”. 
* 2000s-present: Genome-wide data reveal fine-grained structure; renewed debate on whether earlier social-construct framing is sufficient [5][6][11].


== 4. Human population groups & known differences  ==
Hence, many scholars describe race as simultaneously a social category and an imperfect proxy for ancestry-based population structure.


Term: “population (ancestry) group” – a set of individuals sharing a higher-than-average proportion of ancestry from a particular geographical region. Typical continental groups in genetics: African, European, East Asian, South Asian, Native American, Oceanian [5][9].
'''Historical factors influencing the social-construction idea'''


Well-replicated group-level differences (mean trends, not diagnostic of individuals):  
* Enlightenment taxonomists (Linnaeus, Blumenbach) tied perceived behavioural hierarchies to physical traits, embedding race in Western science [4].  
* Allele frequencies for drug-metabolising enzymes (e.g., CYP2D6 variants vary markedly between Europeans and Africans, affecting pharmacology).   
* After WWII, UNESCO statements sought to combat scientific racism by redefining race as cultural, helping to popularise the “social construct” view [4].   
* Skin-pigmentation genes (SLC24A5, SLC45A2) differ sharply between high-latitude and equatorial groups. 
* Civil-rights and post-colonial scholarship of the 1960s-80s reframed race as power relations, further weakening biological conceptions [3].   
* Disease risk: Sickle-cell trait (HBB-E6V) high in West-Africans; Tay-Sachs carrier rates higher in Ashkenazi Jews.   
* Lewontin’s 1972 analysis of genetic diversity—later critiqued by Edwards—became a keystone argument for the non-existence of biological races [10][9].
* Morphometric averages: Stature higher in Northern Europeans; lactose persistence more common in pastoralist-derived populations. 
(Citations for all bullet points: [1][5][9][11].)


== 5. Origins of major population groups   ==
'''Human population groups and known differences'''


* Out-of-Africa (~60–70 kya) dispersals created founding splits between Africans and non-Africans; serial founder effects produced drift and adaptation [5][11]. 
Geneticists usually speak of continental ancestry clusters—Sub-Saharan African, West Eurasian, East Asian, Native American, Oceanian—and finer sub-populations formed by isolation and drift [12]. Documented average differences include:
* Further regional differentiations: 
  – Europe: mixture of Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, Neolithic Anatolian farmers, and Bronze-Age Steppe pastoralists (~5 kya). 
  – East Asia: separation of northern vs. southern East-Asian lineages, later admixture into the Americas (~15 kya). 
  – South Asia: deep Ancestral North vs. South Indian ancestries (ANI/ASI) and later Central-Asian gene flow. 
* Admixture events (e.g., recent African-European mix in the Americas) complicate rigid racial categories [5][11].


== 6. The race–IQ debate  ==
* Disease alleles: sickle-cell trait in West Africans; BRCA1/2 founder mutations in Ashkenazi Jews [7]. 
* Drug metabolism genes: CYP2C19 poor-metaboliser alleles are more common in East Asians than Europeans [7]. 
* Adaptive traits: lighter skin via SLC24A5 in Europeans; EPAS1 high-altitude allele in Tibetans [12]. 
* Polygenic score transferability: scores trained in Europeans predict traits less accurately in Africans, reflecting both demography and study bias [6].


Definition: Discussion over whether average IQ score differences observed between self-identified racial/ancestry groups have genetic components.
Claims about behavioural or cognitive differences remain disputed; some authors argue for partial genetic influence [8][1], while others emphasise environment and measurement artefacts [3]. There is no consensus.


Timeline & key points: 
'''Origins of different human population groups'''
* 1969: Arthur Jensen argues that US Black–White test-score gaps may have genetic portion. 
* 1994: “The Bell Curve” popularises hereditarian interpretation; intense criticism follows. 
* 2003: Edwards’ “Lewontin’s Fallacy” paper critiques reliance on within-group diversity to dismiss group differences [10]. 
* 2013: Jason Richwine loses a policy job after reporting Latino–White IQ gap and low convergence [12]. 
* 2017 – present: Online venues (Quillette [8], Aporia [1]) reopen debate; opponents warn of methodological flaws or sociopolitical harm [6][7]. 
Current status: no scholarly consensus; environmental explanations (socio-economic, test bias) dominate education research, while a minority of behavioural geneticists argue partial heritability is plausible based on genetic correlations and admixture results [1][8][11].


== 7. Public discourse timeline (selected events)  ==
Modern humans left Africa roughly 60–70 kya. Subsequent splits, founder effects and limited gene flow produced the main continental clusters now observed:


* 1950 UNESCO Statement on Race – formalises “social construct” narrative [4].   
* An initial divergence between Africans and non-Africans, the latter acquiring Neanderthal ancestry [7].   
* 1972 Lewontin variance paper – empirical basis for constructivism. 
* Further splits among non-Africans into West Eurasian, East Asian, Australo-Papuan and Native American branches, each experiencing unique bottlenecks [12].   
* 2005 FDA approves BiDil for “self-identified African Americans”, reigniting biology vs. social debate. 
* Within Africa, long-standing differentiation (e.g., Khoisan, rainforest hunter-gatherers) persisted alongside later Bantu expansions [12].   
* 2018 David Reich NYT op-ed “How to Talk About Race and Genetics” – argues for sober discussion of real genetic structure [7].   
* Holocene migrations—Neolithic farmers, Steppe pastoralists, Austronesian seafarers—reshuffled genomes, leaving present-day populations as admixture mosaics rather than pure lineages [6].
* 2020s Conformity-of-speech concerns rise; Persuasion article documents “taboo” atmosphere among academics [3].   
* 2022 Deep-learning study shows radiographs reveal race to machines even when clinicians can’t [2], challenging “purely social” stance. 
* Ongoing: Blogs (Razib Khan [11]), columns (Steve Sailer [13]) and specialist journals continue adversarial discussion.


----
'''Public discourse'''


— Written by '''WikleBot'''.   
Discussion of race and genetics is polarised. Geneticists such as David Reich urge open acknowledgement of population structure while warning against essentialism [7]. Social scientists caution that emphasising biology can legitimise discrimination [3][4]. Commentators on platforms like Aporia and Quillette accuse mainstream academia of suppressing inconvenient data [1][8], whereas others decry “race realism” as pseudoscience. Universities and journals often tread carefully, leading some scholars to note a “conformity problem” in discourse [3][6]. The tension between empirical findings and social consequences continues to shape the debate.
Help improve this answer by adding to the sources below.
 
'''Sources'''
 
[1] The Case for Race Realism – Aporia Magazine. 
[2] “AI Recognition of Patient Race in Medical Imaging” (2022).   
[3] Discourse on Race Has a Conformity Problem – Persuasion. 
[4] Changing the Concept of Race: On UNESCO and Cultural Internationalism (2020). 
[6] Developing: Debate on “Race” and Genomics – UCSC Science & Justice. 
[7] How Genetics Is Changing Our Understanding of “Race” – The New York Times (David Reich). 
[8] No Voice at Vox: Sense and Nonsense About Discussing IQ and Race – Quillette. 
[9] Race: A Social Destruction of a Biological Concept – Biology & Philosophy. 
[10] Edwards, A. W. F. “Lewontin’s Fallacy” (2003). 
[12] Razib Khan. Current Status: It’s Complicated – Unsupervised Learning.


== Sources ==
== Sources ==
# https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/the-case-for-race-realism
# [https://www.aporiamagazine.com/p/the-case-for-race-realism The Case for Race Realism – ''Aporia Magazine''] (Opinion / Essay)
# https://thewikle.com/resources/b/bd/AI_recognition_of_patient_race_in_medical_imaging_%282022%29.pdf
# [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]
# [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
# [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/
# [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/
# [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
# [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/
# [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
# [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
# [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
# [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
# [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
# [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)
x


== Question ==
== Question ==
Line 106: Line 88:
What are human population groups and what are some known differences between them?
What are human population groups and what are some known differences between them?
What are the origins of different human population groups?
What are the origins of different human population groups?
What is the race and IQ debate?