Thread: There Is No Such Thing As "races"

According to the Kingdom, domain, family, genus, species thing (you know what i am talking about), it is impossible for different "races" to breed.

So there really is only one "human race"

thoughts.

Originally Posted by Hominus

According to the Kingdom, domain, family, genus, species thing (you know what i am talking about), it is impossible for different "races" to breed.

So there really is only one "human race"

thoughts.
[/b]

You are getting swept up, then, in two different usages for the same word.

Simply begin counting up the great number of traits specific to the various 'races' as the word is popularly understood -- skin, bones, hair, build, features, susceptability to different diseases. There seems to be a great deal of difference when one begins cataloguing.

But most of the genes are either the same or compatible, so that mating is possible.

Would you rather we called the 'Races' 'Breeds' like we do with the dogs and cats. Afterall, Persians can mate with Siamese (for God Knows what kind of result), and Shepherds can mate with Retreivers. But the Breeds are specific and we have nobody questioning their existence.

Yeah, the terminology IS fuzzy, since in science, dogs and wolves are recognized as 2 different species, but they can mate, whereas usually interbreeding between different species is impossible. Another exception is the horse/donkey/mule thing, with the end result being a sterile offspring.

But like Leo said, 'race' is a kind of ambiguous term. And interbreeding can occur with enough compatible DNA, regardless of the label that is given.

Originally Posted by Leo

Afterall, Persians can mate with Siamese (for God Knows what kind of result)[/b]

It's a Himalayan, though I have no idea if it's actually the love child of a Persian and a Siamese

Well, the distinction in classification is really fuzzy in biology. I agree that we are an extremely similar species--the distinctions between races are almost entirely asthetic--there is more genetic difference between individuals on average than there is between races on average.
Still, there is a difference--perhaps, as Leo said, we should refer to it as "breeds", but I really dont care either way. Race is really a non-issue for me; I would rather see the removal of the distinction rather than the re-labeling of it.

BTW--I had to type that entire post without using apostraphes because Mozilla keeps opening the find window when I try to type an apostraphe. Anybody know how to fix that?

All classifications in the animal kingdom are artifically, we created those borders between species and races.

Actually all organisms are a big blend as a result of evolution.

So actually, there are no races, it's just a human defionition, there are more ways to define 'race'. However we just choose to call poodles an other race then bulldogs and we call people from africa an other race then people from europe.

It just depends on how you look at it.

wow, I can come back from holiday a different race than when I went

omg, you have a Roman nose - you're a different race from me


For a list of *actual* races of humans, past & present
Click Here

Originally Posted by Hominus

According to the Kingdom, domain, family, genus, species thing (you know what i am talking about), it is impossible for different "races" to breed.

So there really is only one "human race"

thoughts.
[/b]

As far as humans are concerned, there is no such thing as "race" from a biological standpoint. It's one of the big things they teach repeatedly in anthropology (in which I have my BA), that there really is no such thing as "race" except culturally. It's a social classification, not a biological one.

"Race" is NOT the same as species, which it seems you're confusing it with. It is impossible for different species to create fertile offspring (thus why a horse and a donkey are not the same species, even though they can produce offspring as a mule).

Races and breeds also really aren't the same thing, considering the degree of differences between the two. Think about it... breeds may be inter-fertile but they are more diverse-looking than human "races." Since "race" is typically determined by looks, then it doesn't make sense to say that races and breeds are the same classification.

Your conclusion is right though.. there really is only one human "race," yet many different ethnicities and cultures. We're all more alike than we are different.

Not being a religious man, I will have to disagree with this.