Race (human categorization) Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.Anti-spam check. Do not fill this in! ==== Forensic anthropology ==== {{Main|Forensic anthropology}} Similarly, [[forensic anthropology|forensic anthropologists]] draw on highly heritable morphological features of human remains (e.g. cranial measurements) to aid in the identification of the body, including in terms of race. In a 1992 article, anthropologist [[Norman Sauer]] noted that anthropologists had generally abandoned the concept of race as a valid representation of human biological diversity, except for forensic anthropologists. He asked, "If races don't exist, why are forensic anthropologists so good at identifying them?"<ref name="Sauer 1992" /> He concluded: {{blockquote|1=[T]he successful assignment of race to a skeletal specimen is not a vindication of the race concept, but rather a prediction that an individual, while alive was assigned to a particular socially constructed "racial" category. A specimen may display features that point to African ancestry. In this country that person is likely to have been labeled Black regardless of whether or not such a race actually exists in nature.<ref name="Sauer 1992" />}} Identification of the ancestry of an individual is dependent upon knowledge of the frequency and distribution of phenotypic traits in a population. This does not necessitate the use of a racial classification scheme based on unrelated traits, although the race concept is widely used in medical and legal contexts in the United States.<ref name="Kennedy"/> Some studies have reported that races can be identified with a high degree of accuracy using certain methods, such as that developed by Giles and Elliot. However, this method sometimes fails to be replicated in other times and places; for instance, when the method was re-tested to identify Native Americans, the average rate of accuracy dropped from 85% to 33%.<ref name=goodman/> Prior information about the individual (e.g. Census data) is also important in allowing the accurate identification of the individual's "race".<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Konigsberg |first1=Lyle W. |last2=Algee-Hewitt |first2=Bridget F. B. |last3=Steadman |first3=Dawnie Wolfe |date=1 May 2009 |title=Estimation and evidence in forensic anthropology: Sex and race |url=https://archive.org/details/sim_american-journal-of-physical-anthropology_2009-05_139_1/page/77 |journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology |volume=139 |issue=1 |pages=77–90 |doi=10.1002/ajpa.20934 |pmid=19226642 |issn=1096-8644}}</ref> In a different approach, anthropologist [[C. Loring Brace]] said: {{blockquote|1=The simple answer is that, as members of the society that poses the question, they are inculcated into the social conventions that determine the expected answer. They should also be aware of the biological inaccuracies contained in that "politically correct" answer. Skeletal analysis provides no direct assessment of skin color, but it does allow an accurate estimate of original geographical origins. African, eastern Asian, and European ancestry can be specified with a high degree of accuracy. Africa of course entails "black", but "black" does not entail African.<ref name="anthropology12" />}} In association with a NOVA program in 2000 about race, he wrote an essay opposing use of the term.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/evolution/does-race-exist.html|title=Does Race Exist?|date=15 February 2000 |website=www.pbs.org |access-date=9 November 2017}}</ref> A 2002 study found that about 13% of human craniometric variation existed between regions, while 6% existed between local populations within regions and 81% within local populations. In contrast, the opposite pattern of genetic variation was observed for skin color (which is often used to define race), with 88% of variation between regions. The study concluded: "The apportionment of genetic diversity in skin color is atypical, and cannot be used for purposes of classification."<ref>{{cite journal |last=Relethford |first=John H. |title=Apportionment of global human genetic diversity based on craniometrics and skin color |journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology |date=11 July 2002 |volume=118 |issue=4 |pages=393–398 |doi=10.1002/ajpa.10079 |pmid=12124919 |s2cid=8717358 |url=http://references.260mb.com/Biometria/Relethford2002.pdf |access-date=25 October 2017 |archive-date=26 October 2017 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171026053656/http://references.260mb.com/Biometria/Relethford2002.pdf }}</ref> Similarly, a 2009 study found that craniometrics could be used accurately to determine what part of the world someone was from based on their cranium; however, this study also found that there were no abrupt boundaries that separated craniometric variation into distinct racial groups.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Relethford |first1=John H. |title=Race and global patterns of phenotypic variation |journal=American Journal of Physical Anthropology |date=18 February 2009 |volume=139 |issue=1 |pages=16–22 |doi=10.1002/ajpa.20900 |quote=Craniometric variation is geographically structured, allowing high levels of classification accuracy when comparing crania from different parts of the world. Nonetheless, the boundaries in global variation are not abrupt and do not fit a strict view of the race concept; the number of races and the cutoffs used to define them are arbitrary. |pmid=19226639}}</ref> Another 2009 study showed that American blacks and whites had different skeletal morphologies, and that significant patterning in variation in these traits exists within continents. This suggests that classifying humans into races based on skeletal characteristics would necessitate many different "races" being defined.<ref name=ousley2009/> In 2010, philosopher [[Neven Sesardić]] argued that when several traits are analyzed at the same time, forensic anthropologists can classify a person's race with an accuracy of close to 100% based on only skeletal remains.<ref name="Sesardic 2010" /> Sesardić's claim has been disputed by philosopher [[Massimo Pigliucci]], who accused Sesardić of "cherry pick[ing] the scientific evidence and reach[ing] conclusions that are contradicted by it". Specifically, Pigliucci argued that Sesardić misrepresented a paper by Ousley et al. (2009), and neglected to mention that they identified differentiation not just between individuals from different races, but also between individuals from different tribes, local environments, and time periods.<ref name="Pigliucci 2013" /> Summary: Please note that all contributions to Christianpedia may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here. You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see Christianpedia:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission! Cancel Editing help (opens in new window) Discuss this page