Sociology

The term race is used to refer to the grouping of people into factions on the basis of a number of genetic traits. It is also defined as a category of people separated as a distinct community by hereditary physical traits. This is the categorization of people on the basis of their hereditary traits that are observable (Back and Solomos 2009). Dalal (2002) argues that Race describes the biological, physical difference between groups of people (Dalal 2002, p.21). The most eminent traits that are used in categorising are colour, facial characteristics and hair type. The understanding of race usually varies from society to society, and changes depending on cultures. The way the term is understood in one culture is completely different from the way it is understood by another. The term race is one that has been surrounded by profound ambiguity and controversial debates. For many sociologists, creating an understanding and analysis for this hotly contested term has been somewhat problematic (Dalal 2002).

The key concepts that surround race such as race relations and racism continues to be an area of disagreement. As a result, an attempt to find a prevalent sociological coherent definition and understanding of race has proven to be limited. As argued by Keita (2002),This unique term is very broad in meaning and due to the social understandings and underlying assumptions, defining race has become to an extent complex (Keita 2002, p. 25). The problematic nature of race is evident from a scientific perspective as it is from a social perspective. There have been studies and theories all striving to bring forth a clear understanding of race and all the other aspects that surround it (Biondi and Richards 2002). The unfortunate thing is that all the efforts seem to have borne no fruits and tends to cause further contradictions and controversies (Back and Solomos 2009).  This paper seeks to explore the problematic nature of the term race. In achieving this, there will be reviews of sociological theories, and the works of eminent sociological scholars.

The first problematic nature of the term nature is related to its meaning, understanding and relations. Race and its meaning has evolved and changed over time (Driedger and Shivalingappa 2004, p.2). This is the most basic area of study in any subject and field. It is supposed to be the area that is very much understood and agreeable (Biondi and Richards 2002). However, this is not the case with the term race. As a matter of fact, this is the area that sparks most of the controversy. Race can be comprehended as a notion that characterises and typifies socio-political disagreements and clash of interests as concerns various types of human relations. The terminology is mostly utilised synonymously with subspecies (Buell and Hodge 2004). From this point of view, human races are believed not to exist. Taxonomically, every person is categorised as Homo sapiens. Many researchers have argued that all the conventional definitions of race are vague, subjective, have a lot of exceptions and progressions (Back and Solomos 2009, p. 15).

Although race is a concept that is widely recognised all over the world, it is one of the concepts that lacks universally accepted definition (Pruett 2002). The meaning and understanding of this concept vary from society to society and from culture to culture. The number of races defined varies with culture causing a lot of debates and controversies. The category of researchers and sociologists who reject the concept of race basically base their argument on the basis that the definitions and groupings that follow from the definitions are contradictory. Race is therefore a very controversial and hotly debated concept (Dalal 2002).

Even if the concept is strongly connected with the growth of the contemporary world and closely linked to the development of enlightenment-related rationalism, the notion of racial relations also retains essentially conventional and illogical descriptions. In the current world, the notion has been discharged as a false impression. It is argued that there exists only one race, and that is the human race (Keita 2002, p. 30). The problem is regardless of the fact that race is described as an illusion it goes on to separate and stratify humanity to a great extent. This means that this concept that is seriously taken for granted has a very serious impact on the society and humanity in general. To some degree, race constitutes a basic aspect of peoples identity, an aspect that is universally recognised. At the same time, race identity means completely different in specific societies and cultures (Boxill 2001). From a rational perspective, the contradiction in the meaning is usually very strange. This is due to the fact that the differences do not generally denigrate the near-collective recognition of racial identity, racial ladder and racially separated status, for example the white being identified as better and more superior to black.

The problem comes in explaining these aspects. The question that comes up as a result is whether race is truly an illusion, as many believe or an objective fact (Pruett 2002). The other issue that emanates is whether racial identity is a natural or socio-historical concept. There are endless questions concerning various aspects of racism, but none seems to have a definite answer. Many wonder if that concept is an atavistic renounce from a past era of capture, colonisation and slavery, which were all based on race, or if it is a lasting way of organising disparity and supremacy (Back and Solomos 2009). 

The modern society fails to recognise the ongoing role of race in the society. This is regardless of the fact that it is still operating as a social reality. Race still connects the micro-social perspective and the macro-social perspective of peoples existence. The idea that discrimination can be founded on race, presumes the subsistence of race. Nevertheless, the concept of race and efforts to deny the fact that race exists seems to have been given much interest among all the studies related to race (Dalal 2002). This leads us to the second problematic area as far as the term race is concerned.

History has seen many debates and researches carried out to find out the real nature of the term race. This area has also been a controversial one with some people arguing that it is a reality and that it exists, while others argue that it has no bases in science (Cashmore 2003). There have been researches and disagreements concerning the existence of the concept, race. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the physical anthropologists in Europe put forward a number of aspects in categorising people. The categories were founded on apparent traits like skin colour, type of hair, body proportions, and the skull dimensions (Boxill 2001, p. 11). This brought about the disparities among wide geographic populace of humankind. These categories that were innocently introduced very many years ago are currently a source of serious controversies around the world. The biological concept of race is no longer considered in apparent characteristics but instead in genetic characteristics like blood types (Buell and Hodge 2004, p. 45). The categories that are established in the contemporary society do not agree with those that were brought forward by the ancient anthropologists. There is also another discrepancy in that a person may be considered black in one culture and non-black in another. It is due to these two factors that sociologists currently consider race more of a social or mental make up rather than an objective natural reality (Back and Solomos 2009).
 
There have been arguments contended by many sociologists that natural races are not a reality in humankind (Biondi and Richards 2002). The supporters of this argument claim that race-concepts and race-aspects are social constructs. There is yet another group that strongly challenge this perception. The explanation of biological race by Robin Andreasen is one of the works that challenge this concept. Nevertheless, sociologists have maintained the argument that there are practical, experiential and theoretical setbacks with the theory of biological race. From a rational perspective, the acceptance of the inflexible dichotomies between biology and sociology, realities and principles, character and traditions, the natural and communal requirements should be abandoned (Boxill 2001). 

DNA fingerprinting is just a single area of investigation that shows evidence of how race stays as a concept and object for mankind population biology. However, this suggestion is untimely to the acceptance of no-race agreement across all the fields. DNA fingerprinting studies also reveal approaches by which reification of race is achieved by biologist through presenting what is cultural or communal as natural or scientific, and whatever is vibrant, comparative and incessant as stagnant, fixed and distinct. The theoretical evaluation of basic concepts of mankind populace biology like population, racial concepts and ethnicity is best achieved by avoiding conventional objective-based ways and adopting a systematic position that identifies the inextricability of science and sociology (Keita 2002).  Currently, many scientists have been involved in the study of genotype and phenotype. They investigate these variations by use of aspects like population and clinal progression. The majority of the academicians have taken the position that race categorization might be supported by universal phenotypes and genotypes, but the mostly-held notion of race is nothing but a social make-up without any scientific evidence (Dalal 2002, p. 18).   

The United States governments Human Genome Project has revealed that the full mapping of DNA up to today shows that there is no distinctive genetic foundation for race. Therefore, as per this revelation, racial characters basically cannot be apparent like dissimilarities in colour or hair texture (Buell and Hodge 2004, p. 36). The project report reveals the fact that skin colour is there as a matter of biology. As a result, there is a claim that whatever exists as racism can be biologically termed as skin colour stimulated prejudice. This concept is appropriate because it is founded on an aspect that can be proved scientifically, is not founded on refuted ideas of biology, and does not disseminate an untrue perception in the refuted aspect of science-base racial concept (Boxill 2001).

Charles Hamilton and Kwame Ture argue that the race concept is a forecast of choices and policies on the basis of race in an effort to subordinate an ethnic group so as to have authority over it (Boxill 2001, 22). This means that race only exists as a reason for some groups to have control over others. It has also been used by individuals and institutions that are power hungry in justifying their dominance over the minorities. This is what is referred to as racism. Therefore this points us to the third problematic area concerning the concept race (Dalal 2002). 

Another area that reveals controversies in the concept of race is racism. No one can deny the fact that racism is a problem.  It is also clear that racism has been there for very many years, since people realised that there are others who have different skin colour, culture, traditions, and language, and that all the efforts to eradicate it have borne no fruits (Afshar and Maynard 1994).  The problem comes in due to the fact that there are many misunderstandings about race and racism. There have been many misconceptions that racism is a concept that is perpetuated by mean people who discriminate others on the basis of their skin colour. This is basically a misconception. It is crucial to understand that racism is a scheme of race-based discrimination that is carried out even by well-meaning individuals (Afshar and Maynard 1994).

Even if racism relates to racial related discrimination, aggression, hate, segregation, or domination, the terminology can also be used to denote diverse and controversial definitions. The Oxford English Dictionary defines it as a conviction or philosophy that all the members of every racial category have traits or capabilities that are special to that group. This conception distinguishes these groups as being superior or inferior to others (Cashmore 2003). The Merriam-Websters Dictionary asserts that race is the basic determinant of peoples characteristics and capabilities and that the differences among races create an internal dominance or inadequacy of a specific racial category. According to The Macquarie Dictionary, it is the conviction that mankind races have unique characters that define their particular cultural beliefs and the belief that a persons racial group is superior and has authority or others (Dalal 2002, p. 52).

Ruth Benedict argues that race is an unbiased logical class of taxonomy. She adds that in itself race has nothing to do with racism. Race is a matter for careful scientific study Racism is an unproved assumption of the biological and perpetual superiority of one human group over another (Dalal 2002, p. 21).   

Eduardo Bonilla-Silva (1997) argued that the central problem of the various approaches to the study of racial phenomena is their lack of a structural theory of racism (p. 465). He identifies a number of problems to the existing methods of handling the topic. One of the limitations is that sociologists have tended to handle racism too narrowly. They have treated the topic as psychological and illogical rather than methodical and logical. They have also tended to handle it as a free-floating philosophy instead of structurally-grounded. Racism has also been taken as a historical phenomenon instead of a modern structure (Loveman 1999). Bonilla-Silva believes that the only way to handle these problems is to come up with a structural theory founded on the ideology of racialised social systems (p. 469). Racialised societies are defined as societies in which economic, political, social and ideological levels are partially structured by the placement of actors in racial categories or races (p.469). Loveman (1999) agrees with the arguments of Bonilla-Silva that problems exist in the study of race. He argues that it is necessary to improve the understanding of the causes, mechanisms and outcomes of the racial concept. However, he asserts that a structural hypothesis of racism is basically not the pre-eminent investigative structure for achieving this objective (Loveman 1999). 

The usefulness of the structure proposed by Bonilla-Silva is limited by three shortcomings. The first shortcoming is the confusing categorisations of groups (Loveman 1999).  The second pitfall is reifying race. The last pitfall according to Loveman is sustaining the unnecessary systematic differentiation between race and ethnicity. He asserts that the theory is not the best in comprehending the most suitable meaning and outcomes of this controversial topic (Keita 2002). Loveman suggests that to eradicate these shortcomings and comprehend better how race influences social interactions and gets incorporated in institutions, there is need to evade race as a distinct category of investigation. This way, it will be possible to improve systematic outlook in the investigation of race as a concept of practice (Solomos 2009). Loveman suggests that the only way for improving the comprehension of race is not to come up with a structural hypothesis of racism, but instead to establish a systematic structure that emphasises on procedures of limit creation, preservation and decline a relative sociology of group-building, established on Weberian theory of social closure (Loveman 1999). 

This paper is a critical evaluation of the term race and the controversies that surround it. It is evident from research and literature review that the concept is surrounded by a lot of controversies that are not likely to end in the near future. The problems associated with the term race begin from its basic level, that is, the meaning. The meaning and understanding of this term has been disagreed and challenged by many theorists and sociologists. Its meaning is vague and ambiguous. This topic that is universally recognised lacks a universally accepted meaning. As it is already apparent, its meaning varies from country to country, society to society and from culture to culture, and this is not likely to change. Proving the existence of the concept has been a problem regardless of the many researches and investigations that have been carried out. Up to date, there has no been any agreement in this area.

Nevertheless, the side that garnered more support in the debate concerning whether it exists or not, is the one that agrees that the concept does not exist. Interestingly the notion of racism has been in existence since the time when human beings met others who possessed dissimilar skin colour, language and cultures. Another problematic area in the term race is racism. Based on the fact that race is a concept whose meaning and understanding is a problem, so is the concept of racism. The basic theory that is likely to fully describe the meaning and understanding of racism has not been agreed on. Even if it seems like there is no likely agreement on this area in the near future, a lot of research needs to be carried out to provide more insight on the topic.