The Origins and Relevance of Race in Biological Anthropology

Race has been a long standing concept in the minds of the human race, tracing back to the
Ancient Egyptians who had a very simple system of classifying humans into groups, so that we may
better understand ourselves. It has been since then, and probably before, that we have evolved this
concept into one of the most controversial, and sensitive topics among us today. Race, biologically
speaking, is under much debate on whether it is, in fact, a scientific concept at all. As stated in the
AAPAs statement on biological aspects of race, published in the American Journal of Physical
Anthropology, There is no necessary concordance between biological characteristics and culturally
defined groups. On every continent, there are diverse populations that differ in language, economy, and
culture. There is no national, religious, linguistic or cultural group or economic class that constitutes a
race. (vol. 101, pp 569-570) The American Academy of Physician Assistants clearly states that
biologically speaking, race is non-existent.

However, from a cultural standpoint, it would be impossible to ignore the significance and very
real existence of race. Scott MacEachern states in his paper, The Concept of Race in Contemporary
Anthropology, Anthropologists have established that ingrained prejudices have often had far more to

do with these racial definitions than have the real physical characteristics of people. Race in these
investigations by cultural anthropologists is conceived of as a cultural construct, not a biological fact.
(Pg. 36 Chapter 3 paragraph 1) MacEachern is explaining here that race is not a biological construct,
but rather a social one, that has been deeply embedded into our societies because of our own narrowmindedness, not our scientific improvements.

As I mentioned above, the earliest record we know of that sectioned off the human race into
groups based on the color of skin was that of the Ancient Egyptians. They had a simple organization of
red skin, yellow skin, white skin, and black skin. It was used as a way of identifying what part of the
world people came from. It was then Carl Linneaus who took this idea and came up with biological
determinism. He decided that there were various intellectual and moral values associated with each
skin color, and he ranked them accordingly. White being the highest, of course. The growing racism
was further realized by Francis Galton, who came up with the concept of eugenics. As he defines
eugenics in his published work, Eugenics: Its Definition, Scope, and Aims he states that, Eugenics is
the science which deals with all influences that improve the inborn qualities of a race; also with those
that develop them to the utmost advantage. Here he is simply stating that he seeks to breed people in
ways that will weed out the lesser qualities, and bring forth the better, more useful attributes. He even
goes so far as to say that the government should decide who can marry based on their physical,
intellectual, and moral attributes. His dream was of course taken into action when Adolf Hitler took
power in Germany and then proceeded to start World War II, but we all know how that ended, and we
all know how incredibly racist his so-called scientific findings are. Race may have started as a simply
way of organizing the human race, but over thousands of years it has evolved into such an issue that
wars have been fought time and time again over its mere existence.

With that being said, there are biological merits to such a concept. It could easily be just another
way of classifying humans into groups, although I believe that complete emotional separation from
such a scientific action is impossible for the human race as a whole, because of the given evidence of
its sensitivity. J. Heirnaux of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization
argues in his article, Expert Meeting on the Biological Aspects of Race that race is not even a solid
concept in biology because no group of scientists can agree on its actual definition, and to even
consider discussing it, let alone using it as a form of classification is absurd if there is no universally
accepted definition for such a concept in science. He goes on to say that any complex set of objects,
here the human race and its populations, cannot be organized into categories because every possible
attribute is of equal value and there is no way of saying that one has more merit than the other. As
Heirnaux states, ...any classification must seem somewhat arbitrary, and potentially dangerous in
causing us to forget the relative and partly arbitrary nature of racial definitions and therefore to make
faulty distinctions and generalizations. (Pg. 3-4 number 4: Criteria of Possibility and Efficiency in a
Classification) In short, it is ludicrous to use race as a form of classification, because it holds no real
scientific or relevant biological merit.
Race has been a long standing organizational tool, used mostly by those who seek to undermind
one color of skin or to raise the significance of one group, but in all reality it holds no more biological
significance than the color of ones hair or eyes. Race is purely a social construct and therefore it has
relevance in Cultural Anthropology, but not Biological Anthropology.

American Academy of Physician Assistants. Biological Aspects of Race.

http://physanth.org/about/position-statements/biological-aspects-race/. 1996.
Galton, Francis. Eugenics: It's Definition, Scope, and Aims.
http://galton.org/essays/1900-1911/galton-1904-am-journ-soc-eugenics-scope-aims.htm . July
1904.
Hiernaux, J. Expert Meeting on the Biological Aspects of Race.
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0015/001577/157726eb.pdf. 10 July 1964.
MacEachern, Scott. The Concept of Race in Contemporary Anthropology.
http://www.academia.edu/831938/The_concept_of_race_in_anthropology. January 2011.
Partner, Genevieve. Genevieve's E-Portfolio.
http://partnergenevieve.weebly.com/anthropology-1020.html. December 2014.