The Study of Racialism

fwsweet · Posted: Sun 15 Feb 2009 15:30 Post subject: Special Rules for This Forum

Special Rules for This Forum

This website studies racialism, which is: (1) belief that ethnopolitical categories are biologically predetermined; or (2) forced assignment of individuals into those categories. This specific forum examines scientific racialism, which is: the search for congruence between ethnopolitical groups and objective physical measurements.

The search for evidence of biologically predetermined "race" continues today and some scientists are racialists per both of the above definitions. They believe that they can identify your "correct" ethnopolitical membership by measuring something in you. And they believe that it is important to remove your freedom of ethnic choice. The number of such racialist so-called scientists has fallen precipitously since 1910, having dwindled to a handful since the decoding of the genome. Nevertheless, their work is a legitimate topic of discussion in this website, since this site studies all forms of racialism.

This forum covers scientific racialism past and present. Before 1910, scientists sought "race" in culture (language, religion). From then until to 1980, they sought it in craniofacial anthropometry (skull bone measurements). (See A Brief History of the "Race" Notion in Science for more.) Today's racialist scientists seek "race" in DNA variation. If you have something to say about people who (1) claim to be scientists and (2) seek to identify ethnopolitical groups by physical measurements, this is the forum to say it in. But there are two special prohibitions here: 1. Do not opine that physical measurements can in fact identify ethnopolitical groups. 2. Base your critique or defense of a published claim only on four points.

1. Do not opine that physical measurements can in fact identify ethnopolitical groups.

Do not claim that racialist scientists have proven their case, nor that they have persuaded you. Discuss racialist studies at arm's length. In other words, you may critique or defend a racialist study but you may not express agreement with it. This policy is deliberately not even-handed. It is based on pragmatism. Debates over whether involuntary ethnopolitical self-identity can be measured in culture, bones, or DNA are sterile because they quickly fall into semantic quibbles over the word "race." To stop such debate, we must stifle either pro-racialists or anti-racialists. We choose to stifle the former because this site's mission is to study racialism, not to advocate it.

For more on this prohibition and its rationale, see Advocacy versus study of racialism.

2. Critique and defense of published claims must be based only on one or more of the following four points:

* Definition – Is the issue defined so clearly and objectively that even hostile but honest skeptics accept the definition? For example, if someone claims to have found a measurement that matches "the traditional racial categories" do they define precisely what they mean by "the traditional racial categories"? To be taken seriously, such a claim must resolve the ambiguity caused by the observed variations in such categories among different cultures, nations, regions, age-groups, socioeconomic classes, and individual prejudices.

* Falsifiability – Do the authors explain precisely what evidence, if found, would make them change their mind?

* Replicability -- Have reported findings been replicated by independent peer-reviewed investigation?

* Conclusions based on findings – Are authors' conclusions backed up by their findings. For example, if a study reports that no evidence was found of Egyptian influence in Mayan pyramid-building, does it nevertheless conclude that Egyptians built the Mayan pyramids?

No other grounds of critique or defense of published claims will be allowed in this forum. Please do not appeal to aesthetics, Voice of Authority, personal taste, or any argument other than those four.

For more on this prohibition and its rationale, see 3.6 Introduction to Science-As-Process.