Originally Posted by
USS Utah
A few years ago I took an anthropology class and came across the following and found it very interesting:
"Biological anthropology encompasses three subfields. The first, primatology, is the study of the nonhuman members of the order of mammals called primates. . . . The second subfield in paleoanthropology, the study of human evolution on the basis of the fossil record. . . .
"The third subfield is the study of contemporary human biological variation. Anthropologists working in this area define, measure and seek to explain differences in the biological makeup and behavior of contemporary humans. In the past, biological anthropologists defined what they perceived as significant differences among modern humans as 'racial' (quotation marks indicate that the meaning of this term is contested). Early anthropologists in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries used the term 'race' to refer to social categories defined on the basis of skin color, hair texture, head shape, and facial features. These biological markers were supposedly associated with in-born ways of behaving and thinking. The controversial book, The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life (Herrnstein and Murray 1994), is an example of such thinking in the United States in its assertion that 'race' determines intelligence and class position. In fact, DNA evidence clearly demonstrates that 'races,' defined on the basis of external physical features, are not scientifically valid categories; they lack internal consistency and they lack clear boundaries. Anthropologists do, however, recognize the reality of racism and that many people in many contexts worldwide discriminate against people on the basis of their imputed 'race.'"
And:
"Race refers to groups of people with supposedly homogenous biological traits. The term 'race' is extremely complicated as it is used in diverse ways in different parts of the world and among different groups of people. Therefore, it makes sense to put the word in quotations marks in order to highlight its multiple meanings. In South Africa, as in the United States, 'race' is mainly defined on the basis of skin color. In pre-twentieth-century China, body hair was the key biological basis for racial classification (Dikoetter 1998). The 'barbarian' races had more body hair than the 'civilized' Chinese people. Chinese writers referred to bearded, male missionaries from Europe as 'hairy barbarians.' Into the twentieth century, some Chinese anthropologists divided humans into evolutionary stages on the basis of amounts of body hair.
"Anthropological and other scientific research demonstrates that biological features do not explain or account for a person's behavior or lifestyle. [Franz] Boas proved this point a century ago, and studies continue to pile up evidence. Rather than being a biological category, racial classifications are cultural constructions. They are often associated with discrimination against and cruelty toward those 'races' considered less worthy by those in power. Examples are numerous. A notion of racial purity justified Hitler in his program of exterminating Jews and others who were not of the Aryan 'race.' Racial apartheid in South Africa denied citizenship, security, and a decent life to all those labeled 'Black.' In the United States, although racism is denied politically, it exists in many domains. African American political scientist Andrew Hacker states that race is the most important criterion of social differences in the United States (1992). In his book, Two Nations: Black and White, Separate, Hostile, Unequal, he writes that no one who is White in the United States can truly understand what it is like to be Black."
Source: Miller, B. (2007). Cultural Anthropology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. p. 5, 21.