Color terminology for race

Identifying human races in terms of skin colour, at least as one among several physiological characteristics, has been common since antiquity. Such divisions appeared in rabbinical literature and in early modern scholarship, usually dividing humankind into four or five categories, with colour-based labels: red, yellow, black, white, and sometimes brown.[1][failed verification] It was long recognized that the number of categories is arbitrary and subjective, and different ethnic groups were placed in different categories at different points in time. François Bernier (1684) doubted the validity of using skin color as a racial characteristic, and Charles Darwin (1871) emphasized the gradual differences between categories.[2] Today there is broad agreement among scientists that typological conceptions of race have no scientific basis.[3][4][5][6]

  1. ^ Oliver, Pamela Elaine (2017-11-11). "Race Names". doi:10.31235/osf.io/7wys2. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  2. ^ The Descent of Man p225,
  3. ^ Race Is Real, but not in the way Many People Think, Agustín Fuentes, Psychology Today.com, 9 April 2012
  4. ^ The Royal Institution - panel discussion - What Science Tells us about Race and Racism. 16 March 2016. Archived from the original on 2021-12-13.
  5. ^ Jorde, Lynn B.; Wooding, Stephen P. (2004). "Genetic variation, classification and 'race'". Nature. 36 (11 Suppl): S28–S33. doi:10.1038/ng1435. PMID 15508000. S2CID 15251775. Ancestry, then, is a more subtle and complex description of an individual's genetic makeup than is race. This is in part a consequence of the continual mixing and migration of human populations throughout history. Because of this complex and interwoven history, many loci must be examined to derive even an approximate portrayal of individual ancestry.
  6. ^ Michael White. "Why Your Race Isn't Genetic". Pacific Standard. Retrieved 13 December 2014. [O]ngoing contacts, plus the fact that we were a small, genetically homogeneous species to begin with, has resulted in relatively close genetic relationships, despite our worldwide presence. The DNA differences between humans increase with geographical distance, but boundaries between populations are, as geneticists Kenneth Weiss and Jeffrey Long put it, "multilayered, porous, ephemeral, and difficult to identify." Pure, geographically separated ancestral populations are an abstraction: "There is no reason to think that there ever were isolated, homogeneous parental populations at any time in our human past."

© MMXXIII Rich X Search. We shall prevail. All rights reserved. Rich X Search