How many "races" exist?

[shagnasty]

When i was a kid back in fifties sixties people did think there could be life whithin our solar system but we know that if there is any life there it is primitive cells or such.pity the mail could had a go at martian scroungers

 

[camouflage]

yes genes can be found - but genes from all over the world can be found there as well - each person has thousands of ancestors, and will have thousands of descendants - which kind of calls into question what you mean by "populations" in the phrase "populations are remarkably stable".

Just one example:

...

Wow. Fascinating stuff, this 'race' thing really is just skin deep eh. Brings to mind waves on an ocean for some reason.

 

[upsidedownwalrus]

Try being a black African and walking down the street in China, and then tell me that race 'doesn't exist'.

 

[camouflage]

Try being a black African and walking down the street in China, and then tell me that race 'doesn't exist'.

What would happen? My friend went to India and they seemed to assume he was a footballer or something, a few asked for his autograph. Some kids asked him "Are you like Frank Bruno"?

But then if you were a blond or somthing walking down the streets of Lagos you'd gain an instant fan-club. Some of that would be because a Westerner in Africa is likely to have a bob or two of high-powered Eurocash to spend, the rest would just be interested in touching your hair.

 

[taffboy gwyrdd]

When i was a kid back in fifties sixties people did think there could be life whithin our solar system but we know that if there is any life there it is primitive cells or such.pity the mail could had a go at martian scroungers

innit man is so wise and all knowing with his science. The probability of no intelligent life in the universe beyond here is actually very small. Therefore there are likely to be lots of races IMO. As far as humans go we are almost identical, as descendants of alien genetic experiements go

 

[_float_]

Try being a black African and walking down the street in China, and then tell me that race 'doesn't exist'.

I agree that "race" as a made-up concept in people's minds does exist - you don' need to go to China or have a certain skin colour to know this - people in the UK talk about 'black' people and 'white' people on a daily basis. I am arguing that this concept of "race" is flawed and has no justifiable basis in reality: that as soon as you challenge someone o explain what it means and what the criteria are for assigning people into one "race" or another, the whole concept falls apart into incoherence.

What would be interesting to know, from a China-based perspective, is what the typical Chinese view of "race" is: for example, does the average Chinese person regard themselves as a spearate "race" from Koreans or Japanese for example? How many different "races" does the Chinese perspective have distinct words for? How recent/historical are these concepts?

 

[Jonti]

A lot of this is semantics. I think most educated readers are clear that there is only the one human race, biologically speaking.

But of course the word is used far more widely than its strict biological sense. And misused too, which I suspect is the real issue.

 

[Jonti]

does the average Chinese person regard themselves as a separate "race" from Koreans or Japanese for example?

My guess: most certainly.

 

[_float_]

So how can they tell?

 

[Jonti]

The human brain has specialist areas devoted to facial recognition and processing. Tiny familial resemblances, barely detectable objectively speaking, loom large in our eyes.

Why do you ask?

 

[weltweit]

The human brain has specialist areas devoted to facial recognition and processing. Tiny familial resemblances, barely detectable objectively speaking, loom large in our eyes. ..

I think it is possible to argue that not only humans are well attuned to individual recognition but other species are also very attuned to their own markings in their own species.

i.e. all seagulls do not look the same to a seagull, all penguins etc etc ..

 

[_float_]

The human brain has specialist areas devoted to facial recognition and processing. Tiny familial resemblances, barely detectable objectively speaking, loom large in our eyes.

Why do you ask?

Are you still guessing?

My original question was directed at RenegadeDog who IIRC actually lives in China.

As for "detecting familial resemblances" - this is no answer at all: being able to recognise the family resemblence between my sister-in-law and her brothers and sisters doesn't translate into thinking that my sister-in-law's family are all members of a separate and distinct "race".

You also are proposing that there is actually some distinct albeit "barely detectable" difference between Chinese, Korean and Japanese people that is picked up subconsciously and is the basis for a belief that these are three separate "races". Quite a convoluted theory to be based on 'guesswork' surely?

 

[8ball]

So how can they tell?

Cos they all look the same to you, innit.

 

[Jonti]

I'm saying it doesn't take much of an eye to tell the difference between a Korean and a Japanese, yes. Or to tell the difference between a Iranian and an Indian, come to that.

Them's the facts. I can tell you don't like it that that's the way things are, but there you go. It's to do with how the planet was originally peopled by the successful migration out of the mother continent around 80,000 years ago. But it has nothing to do with "race" biologically speaking, no.

You may find Oppenheimer interesting on the peopling of the planet.

 

[_float_]

Cos they all look the same to you, innit.

Someone suggested that Chinese, Koreans and Japanese consider themselves different "races", so my question is: 'what criteria are used to do this'?

I am not claiming that all Chinese, Korean and Japanese people 'look the same', but I would suggest that the situation is more akin to British, French and German people - ie there are some differences in 'average' looks but there is a vast amount of overlap, meaning that you would find it very hard, if not impossible, to separate out a group of people into three separate groups based on appearance.

To support what I am saying, it is worth noting that it is common for 'Korean Japanese' people to take a Japanese name and 'live as a Japanese person' - see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zainichi_Korean

However, although I lived in Japan for a year, I have never been to Korea or China (beyond a weekend in HK) and I don't know for sure about how "race"/ethnicity/nationality is conceptualised in these countries - if anyone does I am interested in hearing.

 

[_float_]

I'm saying it doesn't take much of an eye to tell the difference between a Korean and a Japanese, yes. Or to tell the difference between a Iranian and an Indian, come to that.

Them's the facts. I can tell you don't like it that that's the way things are, but there you go.

"Them's the facts"?

O rly?

Well in that case yiou will find it very easy to back up your "facts".

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The "average" Iranian:

"While a categorization of a 'Persian' ethnic group persists in the West, Persians have generally been a pan-national group often comprising regional peoples who rarely refer to themselves as 'Persians' and sometimes use the term 'Iranian' instead. The synonymous usage of Iranian and Persian persisted over the centuries despite the varied meanings of Iranian, which includes different but related languages and ethnic groups. As a pan-national group, defining Persians as an ethnic group, at least in terms used in the West, is problematic since Persians are a varied group."

"According to the CIA World Factbook, Iran's ethnic groups consist of: Persians 55%, Azeris 24%, Gilakis and Mazandaranis 8%, Kurds 7%, Arabs 3%, Lurs 2%, Baloch 2%, Turkmen 2%, other 1%..."

"...the Iranian people include not only the Persians and Tajiks (or eastern Persians) of Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Tajikistan, but also the Pashtuns, Baloch (Pakistan), Kurds, Lurs, Zazas, Ossetians and others..."

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The "average" Indian:

India's population of approximately 1.15 billion people (estimate for July, 2008) comprises approximately one-sixth of the world's population. India has more than two thousand ethnic groups.

Unlike the United States, United Kingdom, and Australian Censuses, the national Census of India does not recognize racial or ethnic groups within India... It should be noted that Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Tibeto-Burman and Austro-Asiatic are mainly linguistic terms and denote speakers of these linguistic groups.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

"A Parsi is a member of the larger of the two Zoroastrian communities of the Indian subcontinent. According to tradition, the present-day Parsis descend from a group of Iranian Zoroastrians who emigrated to Western India over 1,000 years ago. The long presence in the region distinguishes the Parsis from the Iranis, who are more recent arrivals, and who represent the smaller of the two Indian-Zoroastrian communities."

"Modern Mumbai Parsi Family in traditional attire"

++++++++++++++++++++++++++

So how does this having 'much of an eye' work exactly then?

Are you saying that you have a stereotype of "an Iranian" and "an Indian", and in your imagination the two are different, or are you making some kind of bizarre claim that there is a clear visual criteria from separating an Iranian (whatever you mean by that?) from an Indian?

I could repeat that paragraph with 'Korean' and 'Japanese' as well.

You couldn't really have picked two worse examples frankly. You would have a much easier time arguing that it is easier to visually identify a Nigerian and a Swede for example, but for some reason you have chosen examples where there are vast amounts of "overlap" and where the differences are language and culture rather than phenotype (eg Japan -v- Korea).

 

[butchersapron]

This thread was miles better earlier. Before the CIA became involved.

 

[8ball]

Someone suggested that Chinese, Koreans and Japanese consider themselves different "races", so my question is: 'what criteria are used to do this'?

You took my ribbing a little overseriously there.

Still, interesting post.

 

[Jonti]

I'm not using the idea of races at all: I'm using the criteria of descent from the successful out-of-africa troop of modern humans around 80,000 years ago.

Not that I'm an expert, I'm just going on what people like Winston and Oppenheimer say.

Interesting post, yes.

 

[Jonti]

To be honest, I wish this pseudo-scientific ("scientistic"?) obsession with race would just f.o.&d. Socially, the term means a people, nothing more, nothing less. And it is culture that makes a people, not genetics.

(not snarling at anyone here, just snarling )

 

[jimadore]

no races' exist only people lots of lovely people.