anthropology in the news

A few days ago, Armand Marie Leroi, an evolutionary developmental biologist at Imperial College in London, wrote a controversial article in the New York Times. She claimed, that contrary to what anthropologists have to say on the subject, perhaps “race” isn’t a purely social construct, but does have some scientific validity after all.

Anthropologist and blogger Kerim Friedman comments on this article:

“The sad fact is that race is not simply a shorthand for Leroi’s maps with elevations, contour lines, and reference grids, but refers to all kinds of cultural and political differences that have nothing to do with genetics. More importantly, these genetic difference map rather poorly on to our common sense notions about “race,” in ways that do nothing to help us understand the many important genetic issues that Leroi believes the term will help us face.”

He invited population biologist Fredrick Gentz, a Ph.D. candidate at Temple University, to comment on the article.
>> read more on Kerim Friedman’s blog

SEE ALSO:

Alex Golub: OK, OK, one more quick thing on race

Anthropology and Race – Discussions in the Classroom

American Anthropological Association Statement on “Race”

Anthropik Network

When asked this question directly, many people answer that a civilization is simply a synonym for “society”–that a civilization is simply a group of people living together. This definition is betrayed when you press the point with borderline examples. Are you comfortable with the phrase “Inuit Civilization”? Or “!Kung Civilization?” Or “Australian Aborigine Civilization”? Most people are not. There is no doubt as to whether the Inuit, !Kung or Aborigines constitute societies, but we waver on the question of their civilization. Obviously, then, the two words are not the synonyms some would claim. >> continue

Read also the most recent entry The Meaning of Civilization