Anth102 1nd Edition Lecture 12Outline of Last Lecture I. Social StratificationII. Ascribed and Achieved StatusIII. Status GroupsIV. Social GroupsV. Social ClassVI. Race, Ethnicity and CasteOutline of Current Lecture RACEI. Race: Folk Taxonomiesa. Classifications of the world, which often include stereotypes, and reflect specific cultural traditions and differ from society to societyb. Folk taxonomies do not often correspond to biological realityc. When the inaccuracies apply to categorizations of people, they often mirror hatred and mistrustd. What are some of the different kinds of people in the world?i. Black, White, Asian, euro-Americans, African American, Caucasian e. Classifications are examples of how Americans perceive human differences (labeling in race)f. But are they reflective of reality?i. No, the outward characteristics we use to judge race aren’t reflective of realityII. Race: Anthropological Classifications of Human Variationa. Folk taxonomies usually based on ethnocentric ideas of inherent difference in phenotypeand behavior between groupsb. Scientific classification of human variation should uncover processes involved in genotypic and phenotypic variation between populationsIII. Race: Some Early Attempts at Classificationa. Carolus Linneaus (1707 – 1778)- Systema Natureb. Labeled all humans Homo (“man”) sapiens (“wise”)c. Divided human species into four groups, based on skin color and geographic locations: H. sapiens Africanus negrus (black), H. sapiens Americanus rubescens (red), H. sapiens Asiaticus fucus (darkish), and H. sapiens Europeus albescens (white) These notes represent a detailed interpretation of the professor’s lecture. GradeBuddy is best Used as a supplement to your own notes, not as a substitute.d. Johann friedrich Blumenbach (1752 – 1840)- physician and student of comparative anatomye. Divided human species into five “race”:i. Caucasian ii. Mongolianiii. Ethiopian (negro or black)iv. Malayanv. AmericanIV. The Concept of Human Racesa. So do human “races” really exist?b. People certainly behave toward one another as if they doc. No one debates the existence of human variationd. What is debated is how this variations should best be describede. Believers in the race concept divide the human species into finite numbers of groups, with label attached to each, and representing bounded gene poolf. Non-believers tend to see variation in terms of distribution and the adaptive significanceof certain traitsg. Are there “packages of genes” unique to certain groups>i. Variation in gene frequency follows geographic routes (impacted by migration)ii. Human variation is discordant: two groups with similar skin color will differ in other features: height, blood type, facial featuresiii. Massai, Australian Aborigines, and groups in Amazon Delta are all dark-skinned, but do they belong to the same race?1. No, we can’t say they belong to the same race just based off skin colorh. No discrete gene package between two so-called different races – only relative frequencies of one trait or anotheri. A single trait, such as skin color, is not adequate for characterizing human diversityj. Two individuals in the same so-called race can vary by thousands of genesk. Diversity between individuals in a population accounts for 85% of total species variationl. Diversity within “races” equals 8.3%m. Between “race” diversity is equal to 6.3%V. Race and Social Issuesa. Exploration of difference between human groups is valid scientific pursuitb. However, has also led to judgments concerning inferiority or superiority of particular populationsc. Judgments not based on empirical data, as scientific conclusions must beVI. Race and Intelligencea. Much debate over relationship between race (or ethnic affiliation) and intelligenceb. Early 20th century, focused on ethnic groups such as: Poles, Greeks, Italians, and Jews immigrating to U.S. in great numbersc. Immigrant populations extensively tested during WWI, and consistently scored 20 pointslower than national average on IQ testsd. By the 1970s, descendants of these immigrants were scoring at, or above, national averagese. Early low scores due to environmental and cultural factors:i. Malnutritionii. Language difficultiesiii. Lack of experience with testsiv. Types of questions being askedf. Results of IQ tests show that different ethnic groups have different average scoresg. Folks, socially categorized as “black”, score about 12 points lower than do “whites”h. Is this difference due to environmental causes or differences in innate potential?i. As more black, Latino, and other minorities achieve middle-class status, it’s becoming clear, just as for early European immigrants, that IQ scores correlate with the pocketbook and style of lifej. As more minority groups have economic means to buy educational toys, send kids to good preschools, etc.. IQ scores wont deviate much from “whites” in same situationk. Average IQ scores for a population are a gauge of degree to which “white” middle-class standards are presentl. But, other explanatory factors tooVII. Race and Intelligence: A Case Studya. On average, the Japanese score 11 points higher on IQ tests than Americansb. Are the Japanese innately smarter than Americans?c. What else might explain the testing outcome difference?d. In Japan, students attend school 240 days/year: American students gov fewer than 180 days/yeare. Quality of education in Japan is uniformly high. Most Japanese of same social class, and about 99% of same ethnic groupf. Expectations and discipline of students greater in Japang. Heavier course loads and more homework in Japanh. Economic success in Japan absolutely dependent on academic achievementi. Great value for education in Japan. Only 2% Japanese high school seniors drop out as compared to 27% seniors in