Talk:Historical race concepts

Reasons for creating this article

I saw this article has been created and deleted before. I think it is notable and necessary for these reasons: On En, the articles en:Mongoloid and en:Negroid articles link to en:Historical race concepts, which needs a corresponding article here.

There are two different concepts of race: The biological one, which is covered in Mongoloid, Negroid, and Caucasian race on this wiki, and the social one which should be covered by Race (sociology). I'd like e.g. the Mongoloid article to start with something like "Mongoloid was one of the [[Historical definitions of race|three races ...". Because the two concepts are different, it is not possible to say "Mongoloid is a race (sociology)."

I'd like to expand this article (with material from Race (sociology) and some maps), but will not do so while I fear it might be deleted after some hours. --Rsk6400 (talk) 09:23, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Basic terms you must understand

Race in biology is not the same thing as a species. Most widespread species are composed of different races adapted to different conditions in the different parts of the world they live in. The criterion for a species is basically the possibility of interbreeding (genetic crossing -- mating between individuals from different races). Since this happens between all human races, we are one species, and there is no disagreement between authorities on this. Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:35, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Although we are definitely one species, there is a lot of genetic differences between the different groups which lived for long periods in different parts of the world. The evidence for this is absolutely solid and unchallenged by anyone who knows the scientific literature, as in The history and geography of human genes (Carvalli-Sforza et al, Princeton 1994). Macdonald-ross (talk) 06:49, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

@Macdonald-ross: What you said in the 2nd paragraph may be understood correctly, but I'm afraid many scientists would not use the words "a lot of", at least not when comparing humans to species that can be divided into different races. But still, even if we could agree on those words, there is consensus among modern science that humans cannot be divided into distinct races in the biological sense of the word. The sources I gave are some good examples for recent secondary resp. tertiary sources. A more recent and short tertiary source (unanimously accepted by the AAPA - American Association of Physical Anthropologists - Executive Committee at its meeting on March 27, 2019) can be found here.

You removed the sentence "Some scientists had different ideas and spoke of four or five races." I think the sentence necessary to explain the obvious difference between the number "three" in the first sentence and the theories detailed below. Here I don't understand why you removed it.

The other changes you made seem to be guided by the principle "keep the language simple", so they are fine with me. --Rsk6400 (talk) 10:24, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

That "scientific consensus" did clearly develop after pushed into that direction for political reasons. It's not that they did more research and then simply had to conclude in the light of evidence that they had to drop the race concept. That races of man were something discrete was never even seriously suggested, previous. But it was still objectional to egalitarians and universalists for the simple reason that it could be an obstacle to policies they wanted to be implemented. Important names of early race deniers were Franz Boas, Magnus Hirschfeld (Actually a 'sexologist) and people around them. Later it was pushed by the Lysenkoists from the USSR and the UN organizations also picked up on this. And that's why it slowly was dropped and also fought with pseudo arguments like 'race is a social construct' type of sophistry. 105.8.1.250 (talk) 14:25, 25 September 2023 (UTC)

Inventing quotes and knowing the unknowable.

"White scientists invented ideas of races because they wanted to be superior" - While rather odd (Are they issuing the equivalent of a papal bull?), the source does not say that. There is an obvious reason why scientists did postulate ideas about race. It was simply what they observed in the age of discovery. You don't become superior by "inventing ideas". You either are or you are not. What the causes thereof are, that is of course a different matter. 105.12.1.34 (talk) 20:40, 28 July 2022 (UTC)