MWP3 Articles 4 & 5 Summaries with Supporting Quotations

Article 4 Summary:
In his article, Sundquist examines the history and impact of race theory on modern science and how scientists and philosophers such as Darwin and Blumenbach contributed to the scientific study of race.  While Blumenbach is generally regarded as an extremely open-minded humanitarian considering the era of his work, Darwin's blatant racism and white-supremacist beliefs are revealed, and their long-reaching effects are examined in full.  Blumenbach is often regarded in an ironic light, since his open-minded and unifying theory on human races was taken and distorted to match the biased and racist studies of future generations, but in contrast, Darwin is often credited as being the forefather of race theory, leading to the rigorous search for the biological difference between races.

Supporting Quotations:
-"The skewed reasoning of Social Darwinism led to one conclusion as to how to resolve the “race problem”: eliminate the biologically inferior races from the genetic pool" (Sundquist 242).
-"While ethnologists and phrenologists were searching for scientific validation for their pre-formed views of black inferiority, Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution revolutionized biological study" (Sundquist 244).

Article 5 Summary:
In their work, Zuckerman and Armelagos re-examine the work of a L.S. Penrose, whose use of the term "mongolism" nearly botched his career, labeling him a racist.  They mention a conference held by UNESCO in 1950 that addressed the re-defining of the term 'race' in the scientific realm, where Penrose's work helped steer it in the anti-racist direction of being a cultural, historical difference, not a biological or genetic one.  However, this does not stand much in the light of his usage of Darwin's racial terminology, thus negating any positive regard for Penrose.  They also examine the studies and individuals whose thoughts and lives influenced the before and after of the 1950 decision, including Blumenbach, Darwin, and others.  They discuss how Penrose's racial use of "mongolism" may not have had much to do with the re-designation of race, but the endless search for the race gene may have not died out as much as it has if things hadn't played out the way they did.

Supporting Quotations:
-"Darwin and Wallace’s work on evolutionary theory...generated the widely accepted view that race formation was a distant and closed episode in human history, that the races were fixed categories, and that their distinguishing features were non-adaptive, neutral traits" (Zuckerman and Armelagos 15).
-"Despite increasing dissatisfaction with the old, pre-WWII racial science and recognition of the inaccuracies in the genetic rationale underlying eugenics and the craniometric and blood type data in anthropology, generating a coherent replacement for racial science and consensus on a new definition of race proved difficult for the scientific community" (Zuckerman and Armelagos 23).

(MWP3 Precis 5) Rhetorical Precis on "L.S. Penrose and the Study of Race"

In chapter 1, "L.S. Penrose and the Study of Race", of their book on modern anthropology, Molly K. Zuckerman and George J. Armelagos reflect on the work of 20th-century anthropologist L.S. Penrose and how his studies, controversial as they are, have indirectly impacted the methodology of the study of race in many scientific fields, and how the modern scientific concept of race is in part a result of his ideology.  They first study the evolution of the idea of race through the 1800s and 1900s, and how controversial works done by Penrose in the late 1900s were debated on his use of "mongolism" led to a meeting in the science community which redefined the idea of race not as a genetic or biological difference but as a difference in population, culture, and environment.  They write for the purpose of revealing his often negatively-imbued works as stepping stones to a more positive sphere in scientific thinking.  Their chapter is aimed at those who are not familiar with the connection between Penrose's studies and the anthropological concept of race.

Article Link: http://www.anthropology.emory.edu/FACULTY/ANTGA/Web%20Site/Pages/documents/PenroseChapter.pdf

MLA Citation:

Zuckerman, Molly K.; Armelagos, George J. "L.S. Penrose and the Study of Race". Department of 
          Anthropology, Emery University, Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A. (2009).  Web. 15 April 2012.

Annotation:
The specific histories and definitions discussed in this article will give precise and directional qualities to the literature review section, as well as provide a broad sense of how the scientific field should view the idea of race, along with the specific events a persons that the authors believe led to the current layout.

(MWP3 Precis 4) Rhetorical Precis on "The Meaning of Race in the DNA Era: Science, History, and the Law"

In Christian B. Sundquist's article "The Meaning of Race in the DNA Era: Science, History, and the Law", the author asserts a claim that the scientific classification and social segregation of several different peoples into racial subcategories was never 'inevitable' or 'socially justified', claiming that the separation of different races, even in the scientific front, is merely a result of archaic belief systems that now have researchers on two-century-long wild goose chases for the "race gene".   Sundquist starts by defining terms such as "race", "sociobiology", and "anthropology", giving several definitions in many contexts, and then follows up by examining the work of famous scientists such as Blumenbach and Darwin, and how their beliefs and studies have influenced the world's thinking for generations.  His purpose is to counter the perceived justification that many scientists have in searching for a biological difference between different races, since they do such under false pretenses, and such work will only prove to further separate different cultures on not only the social platform but on the professional and scientific platforms as well.  He writes for those either involved in those fields or affected by those fields who also share his ideology that the "race race" is merely a sham reflecting 18th- and 19th-century closed-minded and misinterpreted beliefs and values.

Article Link: http://www.temple.edu/law/tjstel/2008/fall/Sundquist.pdf

MLA Citation:
Sundquist, Christian B. "The Meaning of Race in the DNA Era: Science, History, and the Law." Sundquist 
          Macro (February 3rd 2009).  Web. 13 April 2012.

Annotation:
Sunquist's work will give a background to the setting for potential race theory studies in modern science, showing both a before and after of race theory and how it may still be studied under different names, and how the works of famous theorists may have directly or indirectly contributed to both the race theory of the past and the racial studies of the present.

MWP3 Article 3 Summary with Supporting Quotations

Article 3 Summary:
Bhopal writes an article dis-empowering the age-old origin of the belief that there is a scientific distinction between one ethnicity and another--the birthplace of the concept of "race" scientifically--instilled by 18th-century anthropologist Blumenbach.  He identifies the key misconceptions in Blumenbach's work as the classification of the races from their skull shapes and patterns, and how this was taken as an actually genetic rift between peoples of different continents and cultures, an unfortunate and misrepresented observations that has negatively impacted scientific thinking, studying, and progression in the three centuries since Blumenbach's thesis was presented.  Bhopal believes that the only way to create an unbiased path for future science to travel upon is to dispel this discriminatory origin and to conduct studies under the assumption that, aside from cultural differences, all races are constituents of the human race.  He also writes in response to the common misinterpretation that Blumenbach  intended for the negative stereotypes to be produced from his work, counterarguing that Blumenbach was actually trying to write in order to establish that all races were once species; later scientists such as Darwin chose to pick what they liked from his work to bend it to their construed theories. 


Quotations:
-"[Blumenbach] dismissed leucoplakia, a condition characterised by loss of skin pigmentation, as merely a disease and not even a variety of humanity."
-"Blumenbach’s work was a turning point in the history of race and science, although it was nearly 200 years before the lessons were properly absorbed"

(MWP3 Precis 3) Rhetorical Precis on "The beautiful skull and Blumenbach's errors: the birth of the scientific concept of race"

In his article "The beautiful skull and Blumenbach's errors: the birth of the scientific topic of race" (2007), Raj Bhopal re-examines one of the most influential scientists on the age-old hunt for a scientific difference between races, claiming that Blumenbach's discriminatory goal of defining different races in order to rank them still exists in many professional fields today, biasing the opinions and works of many scientists.  He first talks about Blumenbach's life, about his different studies, and about other contributions he made to several scientists aside from his famous work in anthropology; he then examines the "five races" defined by Blumenbach and discusses how the purposeful separations of different ethnicities has given birth to the majority of not all scientific racism in the last three centuries.  Bhopal writes to reveal a foundation in scientific racism and the reason for the perceived gap between ethnicities that provides a working reason to search for the "biological difference" between difference races.  He writes for those in the biology, anthropology, and other related fields who wish to understand the origins of the racism inherent in too many modern sciences.

Article Link: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2151154/

MLA Citation:

Bhopal, Raj. "The beautiful skull and Blumenbach's errors: the birth of the scientific topic of race." BMJ 
           Publishing group ltd (2007).  Web. 11 April 2012.

Annotation:
This article will allow a quick and easy synthesis of both Blumenbach's work and personal philosophy into the paper, allowing both the irony of his successors' work and the fatal errors made on his behalf to be better introduced during the literature review, and providing with yet another solid scientific model that contributes to modern day race theory.

MWP3 Working Thesis

Many current scientific models contain remnants of racial discrimination from the time of their induction into scholarly practices, and remain unnoticed, negatively influencing the studies and works of several potentially respectable scientists; studies such as sociobiology, biology, anthropology, and many others are based off of models from some famous scientists such as Darwin and some other unsung scientists from the 19th and 20th centuries, and the models and theories that are affected must be re-evaluated and potentially edited in an unbiased and professional fashion.

MWP3 Articles 1 & 2 Summaries with Supporting Quotations

Article 1 summary:
Fairchild writes in response to the works of a scientist by the name of J. Phillip Rushton, who he felt had incorporated racist beliefs, theories, and practices inherent from the studies of Darwin into common sociobiology.  He discusses how there are several factors underlying both Darwin and Rushton's writings and studies that reflect an unapologetic white supremacist standpoint, leading to Rushton's belief that there were actual biological differences between ethnicity, and that factors such as intelligence dwindled between "caucazoids, mongaloids, and negroids".  This lead many sociobiology texts and articles to contain traces of data that claimed certain ethnicities contained a more thorough inherent factor of agreeableness, adaptability, and intelligence.  Fairchild linked this to the original beliefs of Darwin, whose entire theory of evolution was based on the idea that dark-skinned people are "remnant to gorillas".

Quotations:
-"An examination of the assumptions underlying Rushton's reveals that the theoretical orientation is, in fact, unreliable...the basic assumption of Darwinian influence is teleological...the data bases that are used as evidence are frequently misrepresented" (Fairchild 101).
-"The review of sociobiological models of "racial" differences reveals a number of fatal flaws in their theoretical assumptions and interpretations of empirical databases" (Fairchild 108)

Article 2 summary:
Audrey and Brian Smedley write about how racist beliefs have been incorporated into many professional settings, causing leading scientists to study in taboo fields such as "chromosomal differences between one ethnicity and another", searching for an actually biological or anatomical difference between races, trying to expand different members of the human race to entirely different species.  They claim that this would cause racism to become completely commonplace, perhaps even scientifically reasonable.  They write about how the core of racism is in the study of anthropology, and how different cultures and beliefs have always separated people in their studies and practices, causing modern scientists to not see the problem in studying these harmful and offensive topics.

Quotations:
-"Ethnicity and culture are related phenomena and bear no intrinsic connection to human biological variations or race" (Smedley and Smedley 17)
-"The genetic conception of race appeared in the mid-20th century and remains today as a definition or working hypothesis for many scholars" (Smedley and Smedley 19)