Divyanshu67/squad_v2 huggingface dataset:
Race_(human_categorization)

Coop et al. (2009) found "a selected allele that strongly differentiates the French from both the Yoruba and Han could be strongly clinal across Europe, or at high frequency in Europe and absent elsewhere, or follow any other distribution according to the geographic nature of the selective pressure. However, we see that the global geographic distributions of these putatively selected alleles are largely determined simply by their frequencies in Yoruba, French and Han (Figure 3). The global distributions fall into three major geographic patterns that we interpret as non-African sweeps, west Eurasian sweeps and East Asian sweeps, respectively."

Question: What thing that strongly differentiates the French from some other populations be clinal across Europe?
Answer: a selected allele

Question: When did Coop and others find out something about a selected allele?
Answer: 2009

Question: Something that is found at high frequency in Europe could be what elsewhere?
Answer: absent

Question: How many major geographic patterns do the global distributions fall into?
Answer: three

Question: What are sweeps?
Answer: major geographic patterns
Race_(human_categorization)

Another way to look at differences between populations is to measure genetic differences rather than physical differences between groups. The mid-20th-century anthropologist William C. Boyd defined race as: "A population which differs significantly from other populations in regard to the frequency of one or more of the genes it possesses. It is an arbitrary matter which, and how many, gene loci we choose to consider as a significant 'constellation'". Leonard Lieberman and Rodney Kirk have pointed out that "the paramount weakness of this statement is that if one gene can distinguish races then the number of races is as numerous as the number of human couples reproducing." Moreover, the anthropologist Stephen Molnar has suggested that the discordance of clines inevitably results in a multiplication of races that renders the concept itself useless. The Human Genome Project states "People who have lived in the same geographic region for many generations may have some alleles in common, but no allele will be found in all members of one population and in no members of any other."

Question: What can one use to look at differences between groups instead of physical differences?
Answer: genetic differences

Question: Who was William C. Boyd?
Answer: mid-20th-century anthropologist

Question: Boyd felt race was based on a specific differentiation of the frequency of what in a population?
Answer: genes

Question: How numerous would the number of races be if one gene can distinguish races?
Answer: number of human couples reproducing

Question: What may people who have lived in the same area for generations have in common?
Answer: alleles
Race_(human_categorization)

The population geneticist Sewall Wright developed one way of measuring genetic differences between populations known as the Fixation index, which is often abbreviated to FST. This statistic is often used in taxonomy to compare differences between any two given populations by measuring the genetic differences among and between populations for individual genes, or for many genes simultaneously. It is often stated that the fixation index for humans is about 0.15. This translates to an estimated 85% of the variation measured in the overall human population is found within individuals of the same population, and about 15% of the variation occurs between populations. These estimates imply that any two individuals from different populations are almost as likely to be more similar to each other than either is to a member of their own group. Richard Lewontin, who affirmed these ratios, thus concluded neither "race" nor "subspecies" were appropriate or useful ways to describe human populations. However, others have noticed that group variation was relatively similar to the variation observed in other mammalian species.

Question: What did Sewall Wright develop one way of measuring?
Answer: genetic differences between populations

Question: What was Wright's method known as?
Answer: the Fixation index

Question: What is the often stated FST for humans?
Answer: 0.15

Question: Richard Lewontin, upon looking at the FST ratios, concluded race wasn't an appropriate or useful way to describe what?
Answer: human populations

Question: Human group variation is similar to variation observed in what other species?
Answer: mammalian
Race_(human_categorization)

Wright himself believed that values >0.25 represent very great genetic variation and that an FST of 0.15–0.25 represented great variation. However, about 5% of human variation occurs between populations within continents, therefore FST values between continental groups of humans (or races) of as low as 0.1 (or possibly lower) have been found in some studies, suggesting more moderate levels of genetic variation. Graves (1996) has countered that FST should not be used as a marker of subspecies status, as the statistic is used to measure the degree of differentiation between populations, although see also Wright (1978).

Question: FST values greater than .25 represent very great what?
Answer: genetic variation

Question: About how much human variation occurs between continental populations?
Answer: 5%

Question: FST values as low as what amount have been found in some studies?
Answer: 0.1

Question: What is the name of the person who thinks FST shouldn't be used as a marker of subspecies status?
Answer: Graves

Question: FST is used to measure the degree of differentiation between what?
Answer: populations
Race_(human_categorization)

Jeffrey Long and Rick Kittles give a long critique of the application of FST to human populations in their 2003 paper "Human Genetic Diversity and the Nonexistence of Biological Races". They find that the figure of 85% is misleading because it implies that all human populations contain on average 85% of all genetic diversity. They claim that this does not correctly reflect human population history, because it treats all human groups as independent. A more realistic portrayal of the way human groups are related is to understand that some human groups are parental to other groups and that these groups represent paraphyletic groups to their descent groups. For example, under the recent African origin theory the human population in Africa is paraphyletic to all other human groups because it represents the ancestral group from which all non-African populations derive, but more than that, non-African groups only derive from a small non-representative sample of this African population. This means that all non-African groups are more closely related to each other and to some African groups (probably east Africans) than they are to others, and further that the migration out of Africa represented a genetic bottleneck, with much of the diversity that existed in Africa not being carried out of Africa by the emigrating groups. This view produces a version of human population movements that do not result in all human populations being independent; but rather, produces a series of dilutions of diversity the further from Africa any population lives, each founding event representing a genetic subset of its parental population. Long and Kittles find that rather than 85% of human genetic diversity existing in all human populations, about 100% of human diversity exists in a single African population, whereas only about 70% of human genetic diversity exists in a population derived from New Guinea. Long and Kittles argued that this still produces a global human population that is genetically homogeneous compared to other mammalian populations.

Question: What two researchers gave a long critique regarding the application of FST to human populations in 2003?
Answer: Jeffrey Long and Rick Kittles

Question: What do Long and Kittles think of the implication that human populations contain on average 85% of all genetic diversity?
Answer: misleading

Question: Non-African groups of human population may only drive from what type of sample of the African population?
Answer: non-representative

Question: What type of bottleneck did the migration out of Africa represent?
Answer: genetic

Question: How much human genetic diversity exists in a single African population?
Answer: 100%
Race_(human_categorization)

In his 2003 paper, "Human Genetic Diversity: Lewontin's Fallacy", A. W. F. Edwards argued that rather than using a locus-by-locus analysis of variation to derive taxonomy, it is possible to construct a human classification system based on characteristic genetic patterns, or clusters inferred from multilocus genetic data. Geographically based human studies since have shown that such genetic clusters can be derived from analyzing of a large number of loci which can assort individuals sampled into groups analogous to traditional continental racial groups. Joanna Mountain and Neil Risch cautioned that while genetic clusters may one day be shown to correspond to phenotypic variations between groups, such assumptions were premature as the relationship between genes and complex traits remains poorly understood. However, Risch denied such limitations render the analysis useless: "Perhaps just using someone's actual birth year is not a very good way of measuring age. Does that mean we should throw it out? ... Any category you come up with is going to be imperfect, but that doesn't preclude you from using it or the fact that it has utility."

Question: What type of classification system for humans did A.W.F. Edwards argue for?
Answer: characteristic genetic patterns

Question: What might genetic clusters be shown to correspond to one day?
Answer: phenotypic variations between groups

Question: How is the relationship between genes and complex traits understood?
Answer: poorly

Question: Risch feels any category someone comes up with will be what?
Answer: imperfect

Question: Risch thinks imperfect categories still have what?
Answer: utility
Race_(human_categorization)

Early human genetic cluster analysis studies were conducted with samples taken from ancestral population groups living at extreme geographic distances from each other. It was thought that such large geographic distances would maximize the genetic variation between the groups sampled in the analysis and thus maximize the probability of finding cluster patterns unique to each group. In light of the historically recent acceleration of human migration (and correspondingly, human gene flow) on a global scale, further studies were conducted to judge the degree to which genetic cluster analysis can pattern ancestrally identified groups as well as geographically separated groups. One such study looked at a large multiethnic population in the United States, and "detected only modest genetic differentiation between different current geographic locales within each race/ethnicity group. Thus, ancient geographic ancestry, which is highly correlated with self-identified race/ethnicity—as opposed to current residence—is the major determinant of genetic structure in the U.S. population." (Tang et al. (2005))

Question: What groups were early samples from for genetic cluster analysis?
Answer: ancestral population

Question: Where did the groups the genetic clusters were taken from live from each other?
Answer: extreme geographic distances

Question: What was thought might maximize the odds of finding unique cluster patterns in groups?
Answer: large geographic distances

Question: What human activity has only recently accelerated?
Answer: migration

Question: Human migration tends to accelerate this type of what flow?
Answer: gene
Race_(human_categorization)

Witherspoon et al. (2007) have argued that even when individuals can be reliably assigned to specific population groups, it may still be possible for two randomly chosen individuals from different populations/clusters to be more similar to each other than to a randomly chosen member of their own cluster. They found that many thousands of genetic markers had to be used in order for the answer to the question "How often is a pair of individuals from one population genetically more dissimilar than two individuals chosen from two different populations?" to be "never". This assumed three population groups separated by large geographic ranges (European, African and East Asian). The entire world population is much more complex and studying an increasing number of groups would require an increasing number of markers for the same answer. The authors conclude that "caution should be used when using geographic or genetic ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes." Witherspoon, et al. concluded that, "The fact that, given enough genetic data, individuals can be correctly assigned to their populations of origin is compatible with the observation that most human genetic variation is found within populations, not between them. It is also compatible with our ﬁnding that, even when the most distinct populations are considered and hundreds of loci are used, individuals are frequently more similar to members of other populations than to members of their own population."

Question: Randomly chosen people from different groups may be more similar to each other than with members of their own what?
Answer: cluster

Question: How many genetic markers need to be used to show people from different groups are dissimilar to each other?
Answer: thousands

Question: Studying increasing number of groups require an increasing number of what?
Answer: markers

Question: What should be used when using ancestry to make inferences about individual phenotypes?
Answer: caution

Question: People are more frequently similar to members of what populations?
Answer: other populations
Race_(human_categorization)

Many social scientists have replaced the word race with the word "ethnicity" to refer to self-identifying groups based on beliefs concerning shared culture, ancestry and history. Alongside empirical and conceptual problems with "race", following the Second World War, evolutionary and social scientists were acutely aware of how beliefs about race had been used to justify discrimination, apartheid, slavery, and genocide. This questioning gained momentum in the 1960s during the U.S. civil rights movement and the emergence of numerous anti-colonial movements worldwide. They thus came to believe that race itself is a social construct, a concept that was believed to correspond to an objective reality but which was believed in because of its social functions.

Question: What word do many social scientists instead of race?
Answer: ethnicity

Question: What had been used to justify discrimination, apartheid, slavery and genocide in WWII?
Answer: beliefs about race

Question: When did the civil rights movement take place?
Answer: the 1960s

Question: What movement gained momentum worldwide in the 60's?
Answer: anti-colonial

Question: What type of reality do some believe race is a social construct corresponding to?
Answer: objective
Race_(human_categorization)

Craig Venter and Francis Collins of the National Institute of Health jointly made the announcement of the mapping of the human genome in 2000. Upon examining the data from the genome mapping, Venter realized that although the genetic variation within the human species is on the order of 1–3% (instead of the previously assumed 1%), the types of variations do not support notion of genetically defined races. Venter said, "Race is a social concept. It's not a scientific one. There are no bright lines (that would stand out), if we could compare all the sequenced genomes of everyone on the planet." "When we try to apply science to try to sort out these social differences, it all falls apart."

Question: What organization is Craig Venter and Francis Collins associated with?
Answer: the National Institute of Health

Question: What year was the announcement that the human genome had been mapped made in?
Answer: 2000

Question: What doesn't the genetic variation within the human species support?
Answer: notion of genetically defined races

Question: What is a social concept, not a scientific one?
Answer: Race

Question: What happens when scientists try to apply science to sort out social differences?
Answer: it all falls apart
Race_(human_categorization)

The theory that race is merely a social construct has been challenged by the findings of researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine, published in the American Journal of Human Genetics as "Genetic Structure, Self-Identified Race/Ethnicity, and Confounding in Case-Control Association Studies". One of the researchers, Neil Risch, noted: "we looked at the correlation between genetic structure [based on microsatellite markers] versus self-description, we found 99.9% concordance between the two. We actually had a higher discordance rate between self-reported sex and markers on the X chromosome! So you could argue that sex is also a problematic category. And there are differences between sex and gender; self-identification may not be correlated with biology perfectly. And there is sexism."

Question: Researchers from which university challenged the theory of race being only a social construct?
Answer: Stanford

Question: Where was the challenge to the theory of racing being a social construct published?
Answer: the American Journal of Human Genetics

Question: Neil Risch found a 99.9% agree between genetic structure and people's description of their what?
Answer: self

Question: What is a problematic category in addition to race?
Answer: sex

Question: What may self-identification not correlate with precisely?
Answer: biology
Race_(human_categorization)

Basically, race in Brazil was "biologized", but in a way that recognized the difference between ancestry (which determines genotype) and phenotypic differences. There, racial identity was not governed by rigid descent rule, such as the one-drop rule, as it was in the United States. A Brazilian child was never automatically identified with the racial type of one or both parents, nor were there only a very limited number of categories to choose from, to the extent that full siblings can pertain to different racial groups.

Question: What country was race "Biologized" in?
Answer: Brazil

Question: What wasn't racial identity governed by in Brazil?
Answer: rigid descent rule

Question: What were Brazillian children never automatically identified with the type of?
Answer: racial

Question: What may full siblings belong to?
Answer: different racial groups

Question: What determines genotype?
Answer: ancestry
Race_(human_categorization)

Over a dozen racial categories would be recognized in conformity with all the possible combinations of hair color, hair texture, eye color, and skin color. These types grade into each other like the colors of the spectrum, and not one category stands significantly isolated from the rest. That is, race referred preferentially to appearance, not heredity, and appearance is a poor indication of ancestry, because only a few genes are responsible for someone's skin color and traits: a person who is considered white may have more African ancestry than a person who is considered black, and the reverse can be also true about European ancestry. The complexity of racial classifications in Brazil reflects the extent of miscegenation in Brazilian society, a society that remains highly, but not strictly, stratified along color lines. These socioeconomic factors are also significant to the limits of racial lines, because a minority of pardos, or brown people, are likely to start declaring themselves white or black if socially upward, and being seen as relatively "whiter" as their perceived social status increases (much as in other regions of Latin America).

Question: How many racial categories would be needed with all the possible combinations of outward features?
Answer: Over a dozen

Question: What way would categories grade into each other, rather than being isolated from each other?
Answer: like the colors of the spectrum

Question: What did race refer to instead of heredity?
Answer: appearance

Question: What is appearance a poor indication of?
Answer: ancestry

Question: Where is there a lot of complexity in racial classifications?
Answer: Brazil
Race_(human_categorization)

Fluidity of racial categories aside, the "biologification" of race in Brazil referred above would match contemporary concepts of race in the United States quite closely, though, if Brazilians are supposed to choose their race as one among, Asian and Indigenous apart, three IBGE's census categories. While assimilated Amerindians and people with very high quantities of Amerindian ancestry are usually grouped as caboclos, a subgroup of pardos which roughly translates as both mestizo and hillbilly, for those of lower quantity of Amerindian descent a higher European genetic contribution is expected to be grouped as a pardo. In several genetic tests, people with less than 60-65% of European descent and 5-10% of Amerindian descent usually cluster with Afro-Brazilians (as reported by the individuals), or 6.9% of the population, and those with about 45% or more of Subsaharan contribution most times do so (in average, Afro-Brazilian DNA was reported to be about 50% Subsaharan African, 37% European and 13% Amerindian).

Question: What categories have an aspect of fluidity?
Answer: racial

Question: What are people with high quantities of Amerindian ancestry grouped as?
Answer: caboclos

Question: What's a rough translation of "pardos"?
Answer: hillbilly

Question: What do people with less than 60-65% of European descent usually cluster with?
Answer: Afro-Brazilians

Question: What percentage of Afro-Brazillian DNA is reported to be Subsaharan African?
Answer: 50%
Race_(human_categorization)

If a more consistent report with the genetic groups in the gradation of miscegenation is to be considered (e.g. that would not cluster people with a balanced degree of African and non-African ancestry in the black group instead of the multiracial one, unlike elsewhere in Latin America where people of high quantity of African descent tend to classify themselves as mixed), more people would report themselves as white and pardo in Brazil (47.7% and 42.4% of the population as of 2010, respectively), because by research its population is believed to have between 65 and 80% of autosomal European ancestry, in average (also >35% of European mt-DNA and >95% of European Y-DNA).

Question: What would more people report themselves as if a more consistent report were considered?
Answer: white

Question: What do people with a high quality of African descent classify themselves as?
Answer: mixed

Question: How much of the population of Brazil reported themselves as pardo in 2010?
Answer: 42.4%

Question: Brazil's population is believed to have between what percentages of autosomal European ancestry?
Answer: 65 and 80%

Question: Brazil's population is thought to have greater than what percentage of European Y-DNA?
Answer: 95%
Race_(human_categorization)

This is not surprising, though: While the greatest number of slaves imported from Africa were sent to Brazil, totalizing roughly 3.5 million people, they lived in such miserable conditions that male African Y-DNA there is significantly rare due to the lack of resources and time involved with raising of children, so that most African descent originarily came from relations between white masters and female slaves. From the last decades of the Empire until the 1950s, the proportion of the white population increased significantly while Brazil welcomed 5.5 million immigrants between 1821 and 1932, not much behind its neighbor Argentina with 6.4 million, and it received more European immigrants in its colonial history than the United States. Between 1500 and 1760, 700.000 Europeans settled in Brazil, while 530.000 Europeans settled in the United States for the same given time. Thus, the historical construction of race in Brazilian society dealt primarily with gradations between persons of majoritarily European ancestry and little minority groups with otherwise lower quantity therefrom in recent times.

Question: What is roughly the amount of African slaves imported to Brazil?
Answer: 3.5 million

Question: What conditions did the African slaves in Brazil live in?
Answer: miserable

Question: Most African descent in Brazil came from what sort of congress?
Answer: relations between white masters and female slaves

Question: Between what years did Brazil welcome 5.5 million immigrants?
Answer: 1821 and 1932

Question: Between 1500 and 1760, how many Europeans settled in Brazil?
Answer: 700.000
Race_(human_categorization)

The European Union uses the terms racial origin and ethnic origin synonymously in its documents and according to it "the use of the term 'racial origin' in this directive does not imply an acceptance of such [racial] theories".[full citation needed] Haney López warns that using "race" as a category within the law tends to legitimize its existence in the popular imagination. In the diverse geographic context of Europe, ethnicity and ethnic origin are arguably more resonant and are less encumbered by the ideological baggage associated with "race". In European context, historical resonance of "race" underscores its problematic nature. In some states, it is strongly associated with laws promulgated by the Nazi and Fascist governments in Europe during the 1930s and 1940s. Indeed, in 1996, the European Parliament adopted a resolution stating that "the term should therefore be avoided in all official texts".

Question: Who uses the terms racial origin and ethnic origin interchangeably? 
Answer: The European Union

Question: What does using race as a category within the law legitimize?
Answer: its existence

Question: In what context is the historical use of race underscored by its problematic nature?
Answer: European

Question: Race is strongly associated with laws by what type of governments?
Answer: Fascist

Question: In what year did the European Parliament adopt a resolution to remove "race" from all official texts?
Answer: 1996
Race_(human_categorization)

The concept of racial origin relies on the notion that human beings can be separated into biologically distinct "races", an idea generally rejected by the scientific community. Since all human beings belong to the same species, the ECRI (European Commission against Racism and Intolerance) rejects theories based on the existence of different "races". However, in its Recommendation ECRI uses this term in order to ensure that those persons who are generally and erroneously perceived as belonging to "another race" are not excluded from the protection provided for by the legislation. The law claims to reject the existence of "race", yet penalize situations where someone is treated less favourably on this ground.

Question: What relies on the idea humans can be divided into biologically distinct races?
Answer: The concept of racial origin

Question: What community rejects the idea there are biologically distinct races?
Answer: scientific

Question: Why does the ECRI reject theories based on the existence of different races?
Answer: all human beings belong to the same species

Question: What does the ECRI strive to make sure no one becomes?
Answer: excluded from the protection provided for by the legislation

Question: The law penalizes situations where someone is treated less favourably on the ground of what?
Answer: race
Race_(human_categorization)

Since the end of the Second World War, France has become an ethnically diverse country. Today, approximately five percent of the French population is non-European and non-white. This does not approach the number of non-white citizens in the United States (roughly 28–37%, depending on how Latinos are classified; see Demographics of the United States). Nevertheless, it amounts to at least three million people, and has forced the issues of ethnic diversity onto the French policy agenda. France has developed an approach to dealing with ethnic problems that stands in contrast to that of many advanced, industrialized countries. Unlike the United States, Britain, or even the Netherlands, France maintains a "color-blind" model of public policy. This means that it targets virtually no policies directly at racial or ethnic groups. Instead, it uses geographic or class criteria to address issues of social inequalities. It has, however, developed an extensive anti-racist policy repertoire since the early 1970s. Until recently, French policies focused primarily on issues of hate speech—going much further than their American counterparts—and relatively less on issues of discrimination in jobs, housing, and in provision of goods and services.

Question: France has become a more ethnically diverse country since the end of which war?
Answer: Second World War

Question: What percentage of the French population today is non-European?
Answer: approximately five percent

Question: What is the number of non-white citizens in the United States?
Answer: roughly 28–37%

Question: What issue has the existence of three million non-European people in France forced onto French policy agendas?
Answer: ethnic diversity

Question: What type of model of public policy does France maintain?
Answer: color-blind
Race_(human_categorization)

Since the early history of the United States, Amerindians, African–Americans, and European Americans have been classified as belonging to different races. Efforts to track mixing between groups led to a proliferation of categories, such as mulatto and octoroon. The criteria for membership in these races diverged in the late 19th century. During Reconstruction, increasing numbers of Americans began to consider anyone with "one drop" of known "Black blood" to be Black, regardless of appearance.3 By the early 20th century, this notion was made statutory in many states.4 Amerindians continue to be defined by a certain percentage of "Indian blood" (called blood quantum). To be White one had to have perceived "pure" White ancestry. The one-drop rule or hypodescent rule refers to the convention of defining a person as racially black if he or she has any known African ancestry. This rule meant that those that were mixed race but with some discernible African ancestry were defined as black. The one-drop rule is specific to not only those with African ancestry but to the United States, making it a particularly African-American experience.

Question: Groups of people have been classified as belonging to difference races since what part of the U.S.'s history?
Answer: early

Question: What did efforts to track mixing between different groups lead to?
Answer: a proliferation of categories

Question: When did the criteria for membership in mixed race groups diverge?
Answer: in the late 19th century

Question: When did increasing numbers of Americans consider anyone with even a drop of "Black blood" to be Black?
Answer: During Reconstruction

Question: What is a particularly African-American experience because it's specific to only the United States?
Answer: The one-drop rule
Race_(human_categorization)

The term "Hispanic" as an ethnonym emerged in the 20th century with the rise of migration of laborers from the Spanish-speaking countries of Latin America to the United States. Today, the word "Latino" is often used as a synonym for "Hispanic". The definitions of both terms are non-race specific, and include people who consider themselves to be of distinct races (Black, White, Amerindian, Asian, and mixed groups). However, there is a common misconception in the US that Hispanic/Latino is a race or sometimes even that national origins such as Mexican, Cuban, Colombian, Salvadoran, etc. are races. In contrast to "Latino" or "Hispanic", "Anglo" refers to non-Hispanic White Americans or non-Hispanic European Americans, most of whom speak the English language but are not necessarily of English descent.

Question: When did the term "Hispanic" begin being used?
Answer: the 20th century

Question: What is the word "Latino" often used as a synonym for?
Answer: Hispanic

Question: How are the terms Hispanic and Latino not specific?
Answer: non-race specific

Question: What is common misconception in the US about what some national origins are?
Answer: races

Question: Anglo can refer to non-Hispanic European Americans who speak English but are not necessarily what?
Answer: of English descent
Race_(human_categorization)

Wang, Štrkalj et al. (2003) examined the use of race as a biological concept in research papers published in China's only biological anthropology journal, Acta Anthropologica Sinica. The study showed that the race concept was widely used among Chinese anthropologists. In a 2007 review paper, Štrkalj suggested that the stark contrast of the racial approach between the United States and China was due to the fact that race is a factor for social cohesion among the ethnically diverse people of China, whereas "race" is a very sensitive issue in America and the racial approach is considered to undermine social cohesion - with the result that in the socio-political context of US academics scientists are encouraged not to use racial categories, whereas in China they are encouraged to use them.

Question: What is the name of China's only anthropology journal?
Answer: Acta Anthropologica Sinica

Question: Who is the race concept widely used by?
Answer: Chinese anthropologists

Question: What is race a factor of for the ethnically diverse people of China?
Answer: social cohesion

Question: Why does race undermine social cohesion in America?
Answer: sensitive issue

Question: What are academics in China encouraged to use that their American counterparts are not?
Answer: racial categories
Race_(human_categorization)

Kaszycka et al. (2009) in 2002–2003 surveyed European anthropologists' opinions toward the biological race concept. Three factors, country of academic education, discipline, and age, were found to be significant in differentiating the replies. Those educated in Western Europe, physical anthropologists, and middle-aged persons rejected race more frequently than those educated in Eastern Europe, people in other branches of science, and those from both younger and older generations." The survey shows that the views on race are sociopolitically (ideologically) influenced and highly dependent on education."

Question: What years did Kaszycka survey Eureopean anthropolgists' opinions toward the biological race concept?
Answer: 2002–2003

Question: How many factors were found to be significant in differentiating the responses of European anthropologists?
Answer: Three

Question: What did the people educated in Western Europe reject more frequently than those educated in Eastern Europe?
Answer: race

Question: How are views on race influenced?
Answer: ideologically

Question: What are views on race highly dependent on?
Answer: education
Race_(human_categorization)

One result of debates over the meaning and validity of the concept of race is that the current literature across different disciplines regarding human variation lacks consensus, though within some fields, such as some branches of anthropology, there is strong consensus. Some studies use the word race in its early essentialist taxonomic sense. Many others still use the term race, but use it to mean a population, clade, or haplogroup. Others eschew the concept of race altogether, and use the concept of population as a less problematic unit of analysis.

Question: What does the current literature regarding human variation lack?
Answer: consensus

Question: What do some studies use the word race in the sense of?
Answer: taxonomic

Question: What term do some use to mean population, clade, or haplogroup?
Answer: race

Question: What do some eschew altogether? 
Answer: the concept of race

Question: What is a less problematic unit of analysis?
Answer: concept of population
Race_(human_categorization)

Eduardo Bonilla-Silva, Sociology professor at Duke University, remarks, "I contend that racism is, more than anything else, a matter of group power; it is about a dominant racial group (whites) striving to maintain its systemic advantages and minorities fighting to subvert the racial status quo."  The types of practices that take place under this new color-blind racism is subtle, institutionalized, and supposedly not racial. Color-blind racism thrives on the idea that race is no longer an issue in the United States. There are contradictions between the alleged color-blindness of most whites and the persistence of a color-coded system of inequality.

Question: Where is Eduardo Bonilla-Silver a Sociology professor?
Answer: Duke University

Question: What does Bonilla-Silva contend racism is about more than anything else?
Answer: group power

Question: Who does Bonilla-Silva think is the dominant racial group?
Answer: whites

Question: What idea does color-blind racism thrive on?
Answer: that race is no longer an issue

Question: What exists between the alleged color-blindness of most whites and the persistence of a system of inequality?
Answer: contradictions
Race_(human_categorization)

The concept of biological race has declined significantly in frequency of use in physical anthropology in the United States during the 20th century. A majority of physical anthropologists in the United States have rejected the concept of biological races. Since 1932, an increasing number of college textbooks introducing physical anthropology have rejected race as a valid concept: from 1932 to 1976, only seven out of thirty-two rejected race; from 1975 to 1984, thirteen out of thirty-three rejected race; from 1985 to 1993, thirteen out of nineteen rejected race. According to one academic journal entry, where 78 percent of the articles in the 1931 Journal of Physical Anthropology employed these or nearly synonymous terms reflecting a bio-race paradigm, only 36 percent did so in 1965, and just 28 percent did in 1996.

Question: What concept's use has declined significantly in the U.S. during the 20th century?
Answer: biological race

Question: The majority of what group in the U.S. has rejected the concept of biological races?
Answer: physical anthropologists

Question: What textbooks introducing anthropology have rejected race as a valid concept since 1932?
Answer: college

Question: How many books out of 33, from 1975 to 1984, rejected race?
Answer: thirteen

Question: What percentage of articles in 1996 employed a bio-race paradigm?
Answer: 28 percent
Race_(human_categorization)

According to the 2000 edition of a popular physical anthropology textbook, forensic anthropologists are overwhelmingly in support of the idea of the basic biological reality of human races. Forensic physical anthropologist and professor George W. Gill has said that the idea that race is only skin deep "is simply not true, as any experienced forensic anthropologist will affirm" and "Many morphological features tend to follow geographic boundaries coinciding often with climatic zones. This is not surprising since the selective forces of climate are probably the primary forces of nature that have shaped human races with regard not only to skin color and hair form but also the underlying bony structures of the nose, cheekbones, etc. (For example, more prominent noses humidify air better.)" While he can see good arguments for both sides, the complete denial of the opposing evidence "seems to stem largely from socio-political motivation and not science at all". He also states that many biological anthropologists see races as real yet "not one introductory textbook of physical anthropology even presents that perspective as a possibility. In a case as flagrant as this, we are not dealing with science but rather with blatant, politically motivated censorship".

Question: What group of anthropologists overwhelmingly support the idea of human races?
Answer: forensic

Question: What does George W. Gill think about the veracity of the idea that race is only skin deep?
Answer: simply not true

Question: What are probably the primary forces of nature which shaped human races?
Answer: selective forces of climate

Question: What does Gill think the complete denial of opposing evidence stems from?
Answer: socio-political motivation

Question: What does Gill attribute the lack of presenting the perspective as a possibility to?
Answer: politically motivated censorship
Race_(human_categorization)

"Race" is still sometimes used within forensic anthropology (when analyzing skeletal remains), biomedical research, and race-based medicine. Brace has criticized this, the practice of forensic anthropologists for using the controversial concept "race" out of convention when they in fact should be talking about regional ancestry. He argues that while forensic anthropologists can determine that a skeletal remain comes from a person with ancestors in a specific region of Africa, categorizing that skeletal as being "black" is a socially constructed category that is only meaningful in the particular context of the United States, and which is not itself scientifically valid.

Question: What type of anthropology is "race" sometimes still used within?
Answer: forensic

Question: What term would Brace prefer forensic anthropologists use?
Answer: regional ancestry

Question: What can forensic anthropologists determine about the ancestors of someone from their skeletal remains?
Answer: specific region

Question: What does Brace feel the term "black" in meaningful in?
Answer: particular context

Question: Why is it bad that a category is merely socially constructed?
Answer: is not itself scientifically valid
Race_(human_categorization)

The authors of the study also examined 77 college textbooks in biology and 69 in physical anthropology published between 1932 and 1989. Physical anthropology texts argued that biological races exist until the 1970s, when they began to argue that races do not exist. In contrast, biology textbooks did not undergo such a reversal but many instead dropped their discussion of race altogether. The authors attributed this to biologists trying to avoid discussing the political implications of racial classifications, instead of discussing them, and to the ongoing discussions in biology about the validity of the concept "subspecies". The authors also noted that some widely used textbooks in biology such as Douglas J. Futuyama's 1986 "Evolutionary Biology" had abandoned the race concept, "The concept of race, masking the overwhelming genetic similarity of all peoples and the mosaic patterns of variation that do not correspond to racial divisions, is not only socially dysfunctional but is biologically indefensible as well (pp. 5 18-5 19)." (Lieberman et al. 1992, pp. 316–17)

Question: How many college textbooks in biology did the authors of the study examine?
Answer: 77

Question: Up until when did physical anthropology texts still argue that biological races exist?
Answer: the 1970s

Question: What did biology textbooks drop altogether?
Answer: their discussion of race

Question: What were biologists trying to avoid discussing the political implications of?
Answer: racial classifications

Question: What did Douglas J. Futuyama consider the concept of race as not only being socially dysfunctional but this as well?
Answer: biologically indefensible
Race_(human_categorization)

Morning (2008) looked at high school biology textbooks during the 1952-2002 period and initially found a similar pattern with only 35% directly discussing race in the 1983–92 period from initially 92% doing so. However, this has increased somewhat after this to 43%. More indirect and brief discussions of race in the context of medical disorders have increased from none to 93% of textbooks. In general, the material on race has moved from surface traits to genetics and evolutionary history. The study argues that the textbooks' fundamental message about the existence of races has changed little.

Question: What did Morning find when he looked at biology textbooks during the 1952-2002 period?
Answer: similar pattern

Question: How many of the textbooks between 1983 and 1992 discussed race?
Answer: 35%

Question: After 1992, what did the percentage of textbooks discussing race increase to?
Answer: 43%

Question: What percentage have discussions of race in the context of medical disorders increased from zero to?
Answer: 93%

Question: What does the study argue about the fundamental message regarding the existence of races?
Answer: changed little
Race_(human_categorization)

In the United States, federal government policy promotes the use of racially categorized data to identify and address health disparities between racial or ethnic groups. In clinical settings, race has sometimes been considered in the diagnosis and treatment of medical conditions. Doctors have noted that some medical conditions are more prevalent in certain racial or ethnic groups than in others, without being sure of the cause of those differences. Recent interest in race-based medicine, or race-targeted pharmacogenomics, has been fueled by the proliferation of human genetic data which followed the decoding of the human genome in the first decade of the twenty-first century. There is an active debate among biomedical researchers about the meaning and importance of race in their research. Proponents of the use of racial categories in biomedicine argue that continued use of racial categorizations in biomedical research and clinical practice makes possible the application of new genetic findings, and provides a clue to diagnosis.

Question: Who promotes the use of racially categorized data in the United States?
Answer: federal government

Question: What has race sometimes been used in clinical settings to diagnose and treat?
Answer: medical conditions

Question: What have doctors noted about some medical conditions in certain racial groups?
Answer: more prevalent

Question: What fueled the recent interest in race-based medicine?
Answer: proliferation of human genetic data

Question: What do proponents of the use of racial categories in biomedicine think it makes possible?
Answer: application of new genetic findings,
Race_(human_categorization)

Other researchers point out that finding a difference in disease prevalence between two socially defined groups does not necessarily imply genetic causation of the difference. They suggest that medical practices should maintain their focus on the individual rather than an individual's membership to any group. They argue that overemphasizing genetic contributions to health disparities carries various risks such as reinforcing stereotypes, promoting racism or ignoring the contribution of non-genetic factors to health disparities. International epidemiological data show that living conditions rather than race make the biggest difference in health outcomes even for diseases that have "race-specific" treatments. Some studies have found that patients are reluctant to accept racial categorization in medical practice.

Question: What does finding a difference in disease prevalence between two socially defined groups not necessarily imply?
Answer: genetic causation of the difference

Question: What do some research suggest medical practices should maintain their focus on?
Answer: the individual

Question: What is a risk of overemphasizing genetic contributions to health issues?
Answer: reinforcing stereotypes

Question: What is makes more of a difference than race in health outcomes for "race specific" diseases?
Answer: living conditions

Question: What have some studies found patients reluctant to accept in medical practice?
Answer: racial categorization