Race (human categorization)
In 1684, François Bernier published a text titled Nouvelle division de la terre par les différents espèces ou races qui l'habitant. This work marked one of the first post-Graeco-Roman attempts to classify humans into distinct groups based on physical appearance. The classification system divided humanity into four categories: European, Asian, American, and African. Each category was assigned specific behavioral traits that reflected the prejudices of the time. Homo sapiens europaeus received descriptions like active, acute, and adventurous. Homo sapiens afer, however, was labeled as crafty, lazy, and careless. These labels emerged during an era when European powers were expanding their colonial empires across the globe. The Atlantic slave trade created a powerful economic incentive to categorize human groups in ways that justified subordination. By linking inherited physical differences to inherited intellectual qualities, Europeans established a framework for racial hierarchy. This ideology persisted through the 17th, 18th, and 19th centuries, merging folk beliefs with scientific explanations. Carl Linnaeus, the inventor of zoological taxonomy, reinforced these ideas in his 1735 classification of the human species. He arranged continental varieties along a continuum of desirable to undesirable attributes. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach later proposed five major divisions but did not establish a strict hierarchy among them. Despite this, subsequent influential classifications by Georges Buffon and Petrus Camper continued to treat Negros as inferior to Europeans. Thomas Jefferson's theories in the United States further cemented the belief that Africans were intellectually inferior to whites. These early taxonomic models laid the groundwork for what historians now call the ideology of race.
Modern genetic research has fundamentally challenged the biological validity of racial categories. In 2000, Craig Venter and Francis Collins announced the mapping of the human genome. Their examination revealed that genetic variation within the human species is only about 1 to 3 percent. The types of variations do not support the notion of genetically defined races. There are no bright lines that would stand out if scientists compared all sequenced genomes on Earth. A study published in 2002 found little to no evidence that humans were divided into distinct biological groups. Anthropologist C. Loring Brace observed that physical traits like skin color exist along geographic gradations called clines. These clines cross traditional racial boundaries without creating discrete units. Theodore Dobzhansky argued that while there are objective genetic differences between populations, it does not follow that racially distinct populations must be given racial labels. The Human Genome Project states that no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other. Statistical analysis shows that an average of 85 percent of statistical genetic variation exists within local populations. Only approximately 7 percent occurs between local populations within the same continent. Roughly 8 percent of variation occurs between large groups living on different continents. This distribution pattern contradicts the idea that race represents a natural taxonomic division of the human species. Genetic surveys demonstrate that human races are not distinct lineages. They are not pure populations that evolved independently of one another.
Different nations employ vastly different approaches to racial categorization. In South Africa, the Population Registration Act of 1950 recognized only White, Black, and Coloured groups. Indians were added later to this legal framework. The government of Myanmar recognizes eight major national ethnic races. The Brazilian census classifies people into five distinct categories: brancos, pardos, pretos, amarelos, and indigenous. These categories reflect local histories and social relations rather than universal biological truths. The United States developed unique criteria for membership in these races during the Reconstruction era. Increasing numbers of Americans began considering anyone with one drop of known Black blood to be Black regardless of appearance. By the early 20th century, this notion became statutory in many states. Amerindians continued to be defined by a certain percentage of Indian blood called blood quantum. To be White required perceived pure White ancestry. The decennial censuses conducted since 1790 created an incentive to establish rigid racial categories. The term Hispanic emerged in the 20th century with labor migration from Spanish-speaking countries. Today Latino is often used as a synonym for Hispanic yet includes people who consider themselves distinct races. The European Union uses terms racial origin and ethnic origin synonymously in its documents. However, the Council of the European Union states that using racial origin does not imply acceptance of such theories. In 1996, the European Parliament adopted a resolution stating that the term should therefore be avoided in all official texts. This reflects historical resonance associated with laws promulgated by Nazi and Fascist governments during the 1930s and 1940s.
Modern science regards race as a social construct assigned based on rules made by society. A 2019 statement by the American Association of Physical Anthropologists declares that race does not provide accurate representation of human biological variation. It was never accurate in the past and remains inaccurate when referencing contemporary human populations. Humans are not divided biologically into distinct continental types or racial genetic clusters. Western concept of race must be understood as a classification system that emerged from European colonialism. A survey conducted in 1985 asked 1,200 American scientists how many disagree with the proposition that there are biological races in Homo sapiens. Among physical anthropologists, 41 percent disagreed while 53 percent of cultural anthropologists disagreed. By 1999, the number of anthropologists disagreeing had risen substantially to 69 percent for physical anthropologists and 80 percent for cultural anthropologists. The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine formally declared in March 2023 that researchers should not use race as a proxy for describing human genetic variation. Their report titled Using Population Descriptors in Genetics and Genomics Research states that race is a socially constructed designation. They describe it as a misleading and harmful surrogate for population genetic differences. The committee co-chair Charmaine D. Royal agreed that classifying people by race is a practice entangled with racism. Despite this consensus, some forensic anthropologists continue to support the idea of basic biological reality of human races. Professor George W. Gill argues that denying opposing evidence stems largely from socio-political motivation rather than science.
Race continues to be used within biomedical research despite scientific objections. In clinical settings, race has sometimes been considered in diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions. Doctors have noted that some medical conditions are more prevalent in certain racial or ethnic groups without knowing the cause of those differences. Recent interest in race-based medicine or race-targeted pharmacogenomics persists. A 1994 examination found that 75 percent of English sport exercise science textbooks did not mention nor refute the concept of biophysical differences due to race. In February 2001, editors of Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine asked authors not to use race and ethnicity when there is no biological reason for doing so. Nature Genetics now asks authors to explain why they make use of particular ethnic groups or populations. A 2021 study examined over 11,000 papers from 1949 to 2018 in the American Journal of Human Genetics. It found that race was used in only 5 percent of papers published in the last decade down from 22 percent in the first. Together with an increase in use of terms like ethnicity ancestry and location-based terms it suggests human geneticists have mostly abandoned the term race. Federal government policy promotes use of racially categorized data to identify health disparities between groups. This practice remains controversial among scientists who argue that such classifications mask overwhelming genetic similarity. The committee co-chair Robert O. Keohane stated that classifying people by race is a practice entangled with racism.
Up Next
Continue Browsing
Common questions
When did François Bernier publish his text on human racial classification?
François Bernier published the text titled Nouvelle division de la terre par les différents espèces ou races qui l'habitant in 1684. This work marked one of the first post-Graeco-Roman attempts to classify humans into distinct groups based on physical appearance.
What percentage of genetic variation exists within local populations according to modern research?
Statistical analysis shows that an average of 85 percent of statistical genetic variation exists within local populations. Only approximately 7 percent occurs between local populations within the same continent and roughly 8 percent occurs between large groups living on different continents.
How does racial identity function differently in Brazil compared to the United States?
In Brazil, racial identity was never governed by rigid descent rules like the one-drop rule used in the United States. A Brazilian child was never automatically identified with the racial type of one or both parents, and full siblings could pertain to different racial groups based on their appearance.
What did the National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine declare about race in March 2023?
The National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine formally declared in March 2023 that researchers should not use race as a proxy for describing human genetic variation. Their report titled Using Population Descriptors in Genetics and Genomics Research states that race is a socially constructed designation.
Why did François Bernier assign specific behavioral traits to his four categories of humanity?
Each category was assigned specific behavioral traits that reflected the prejudices of the time when European powers were expanding their colonial empires across the globe. The Atlantic slave trade created a powerful economic incentive to categorize human groups in ways that justified subordination.