National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
1–10 of 100 posts
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#2we can't define "night" either.
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#3Turn back, lest this comment section become a graveyard.
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#4Generalizations can be useful in science. I know some of the definitions I use in my field probably describe groups of heterogeneous things. But these definitions can be appropriate when more granular approach isn’t feasible.
But yes, everything is a spectrum, boundaries are blurry etc. it’s just often times this line of thinking doesn’t lead you anywhere.
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#5Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#6“In humans, race is a socially constructed designation, a misleading and harmful surrogate for population genetic differences, and has a long history of being incorrectly identified as the major genetic reason for phenotypic differences between groups. Rather, human genetic variation is the result of many forces—historical, social, biological—and no single variable fully represents this complexity. The structure of genetic variation results from repeated human population mixing and movements across time, yet the misconception that human beings can be naturally divided into biologically distinguishable races has been extremely resilient and has become embedded in scientific research, medical practice and technologies, and formal education.”
Dumb question… why would using ethnicity (which is accepted) solve any issues? And, can people choose their ethnicity or is it determined at birth? Complicated, I bet.
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#7we can't define "night" either.
yeah but with night there is just some quibbling around the edges, is civil twilight night etc. This is more like reptiles, it's a concept that when you pick at it the concept as popularly used it falls apart (for reptiles you either need to include birds or break it up into at least two groups).
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#8we can't define "night" either.
Yes, and you shouldn't use it either. Do you mean night as in dark conditions or night as in the night time? When does it start, when does it end? Is it a threshold or a discrete night-not night effect?
These questions don't have a right or wrong answer. So don't use the word night, or if you do, define exactly what you mean by it.
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#9Lots of categories have fuzzy edges. It doesn’t mean they’re not useful or that they don’t exist.
Re: National Academies: We can’t define “race,” so stop using it in science
#10Lots of categories have fuzzy edges. It doesn’t mean they’re not useful or that they don’t exist.
I defy you to describe race in certain terms.