Throughout history science has been used to highlight the differences between humans and ultimately use these differences to create inequality in our society. That why when reading the American Association of Physical Anthropologist’s (AAPA) statement on biological aspects of race the line that stuck out to me was “scientist should try to keep the results of their research from being used in a biased way that would serve discriminatory ends.” I think this is important in outlining the responsibility scientific fields have. The article goes on to disprove and go against a lot of the bunk science that has been used to justify racism. The AAPA’s statement covers science related to inheritance, migration, heredity, genetic variation, etc. all in hopes to disprove the concept of race from a scientific standpoint. The American Anthropological Association’s (AAA) statement on race discusses the more social construction of race and its involvement in creating inequality. They also mention how bunk science in the early 19th century promoted ideas that one race is lesser than another. They specifically mention the idea that “Africans (were) the least human and closer taxonomically to apes.” These ideas were created to benefit those in power or trying to gain power. They go on to mention “that the human cultural behavior is learned” which as a sociologist I found interesting as it relates to this idea of nature vs nurture. I think the AAA would conclude that race is something learned through social, economic, education, and political circumstances.
Based on what I have learned in this course, I would explain non-existence of biological race to a person unfamiliar with the idea by explaining the social construction of race and the science behind race. I would mention that the definition and categorization of race is not the same in every culture and race can be a very abstract idea. Scientifically we all belong to the species Homo sapiens and we all have evolved from the same ancestral group. Though there is a lot of diversity within the human race there is no such thing as a pure race. Based on science a lot of the traits we use to define someone’s race are not actually all genetic but rather based on the mix of the environment one is in and their genes. And even the environmental malleability of traits is seen across all inherited traits. Relating to social construction I would mention the history of race. Historically race was used in the 18th century by colonial America in conquering the Indians and justifying slave labor. Then I would discuss the social construction aspect of socialization. Meaning the ways in which we learn norms and ideologies of society. I would mention how from birth humans do not have a culture or language, but rather learn these things as they grow older. By explain all this background regarding races construction I think we can tackle a lot of the issues surrounding racism.
In todays societ we still see people talk about these stereotypes on the concept of race. In the AAA article is stated how the English and Europeans decided they were the superior race solely off being selfish and being power hungry based off of their physical differences. It is later stated how we are all from a common decent and are very much alike. Physical differences come from like you said, nature vs nurture, according to the articles. Depending on geographical differences and the environment a human being lives in that affects their physical attributes, not that they are any better or lesser than an other. I would take the same approach talking to someone that was not familiar with this subject. I would explain why we as a society put so much emphasis on race and why many correlate it with physical attributes and then explain the facts and science of what race really is. We are all born without any beliefs, not knowing a language or anything, we are brought up depending on where we are born and who is raising us.