Race: Biological or Socially Constructed Options

[Tung]

Is race biologically determined, or is it something we people socially constructed? Discuss. I'm hoping for a good debate.

[Tung]

That's probably correct. The point of the post, however, is that it is ok to admit that race is socially constructed even if you believe it has a biological basis.

I mean we were not born with a race. Our bodies doesn't technically hold essential racial truths. You talk about skin color. An example would be a person who is considered Black can have light skin, European features, straight hair, or blue eyes, or even all of these at the same time. Would he be considered Black or White if you are determining race from just physical features?

It could be socially constructed, as an example today. A 5'7 guy back in the 18th century, would be consider tall, but if you are talking about today, it would be consider average or short. Height is socially constructed.

That's the same for race. Scientists agree that race is socially constructed, and not having find a set of characteristics, that will always hold true for a particular race. However, of course there might be some biological component to race. Surely because we can all recognize and distinguish each other from physical characteristics of particular races, even though some people in these racial group may not have these characteristics.

It's been studied that there are no genes or single gene alone that determines race. Contrary to popular opinion, but it is said that there are more genetic differences and variations among intra-racial groups and it exceeds inter-racial groups. That is, greater genetic variation exists within the populations typically labeled Black and White than between these populations. This finding refutes the supposition that racial divisions reflect fundamental genetic differences.

But the point of the debate is not a simple matter just physical appearances like you pointed out. Because there is a strong argument on race being socially constructed, as racial classifications can change, and have changed drastically.

[Elba]

That's probably correct. The point of the post, however, is that it is ok to admit that race is socially constructed even if you believe it has a biological basis.

I mean we were not born with a race. Our bodies doesn't technically hold essential racial truths. You talk about skin color. An example would be a person who is considered Black can have light skin, European features, straight hair, or blue eyes, or even all of these at the same time. Would he be considered Black or White if you are determining race from just physical features?

It could be socially constructed, as an example today. A 5'7 guy back in the 18th century, would be consider tall, but if you are talking about today, it would be consider average or short. Height is socially constructed.

That's the same for race. Scientists agree that race is socially constructed, and not having find a set of characteristics, that will always hold true for a particular race. However, of course there might be some biological component to race. Surely because we can all recognize and distinguish each other from physical characteristics of particular races, even though some people in these racial group may not have these characteristics.

It's been studied that there are no genes or single gene alone that determines race. Contrary to popular opinion, but it is said that there are more genetic differences and variations among intra-racial groups and it exceeds inter-racial groups. That is, greater genetic variation exists within the populations typically labeled Black and White than between these populations. This finding refutes the supposition that racial divisions reflect fundamental genetic differences.

But the point of the debate is not a simple matter just physical appearances like you pointed out. Because there is a strong argument on race being socially constructed, as racial classifications can change, and have changed drastically.

I agree 100%