RE: [wc] Re: "the full context"
- Rafael wrote:
> Anyone who has taken courses in physical anthropologyPeople who teach courses in physical anthropology often reject the conception of race to which many anthroposophists remain attached. I'll provide some relevant sources below.
> ThisNot to mention a large and interesting part of the history of racist thought.
> subject forms a large and interesting part of the science of racial
> Yet, what academic racial theory lacks is the element ofThat claim is very wide of the mark, historically speaking. Evolutionary and migrational models formed a central part of much of modern academic racial theory, and were not definitively discredited in the eyes of the broader academic community until after 1945.
> evolution in the migrational progression of the races.
> So, if we take the excerpt again from "EofC", it actually appears veryWhether it is true and whether it is racist have nothing to do with one another.
> pristine and true, doesn't it?
For those interested, here are some readily accessible sources on the subjects Rafael raises. A good place to start is the American Association of Physical Anthropologists Statement on Biological Aspects of Race:
as well as the American Anthropological Association Statement on "Race":
as well as the relatively recent piece by biological anthropologist Alan Goodman, former president of the American Anthropological Association:
and this similarly pertinent essay by biological anthropologist Jonathan Marks:
There are lots and lots more such sources. On the history of what Rafael calls "the science of racial theory" I recommend the following:
Hamilton Cravens, “What's New in Science and Race since the 1930s? Anthropologists and Racial Essentialism” The Historian 72 (2010), 299-320
George Stocking, Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology (New York 1968)
John Haller, Outcasts from Evolution: Scientific Attitudes of Racial Inferiority 1859-1900 (New York 1971)
Elazar Barkan, The Retreat of Scientific Racism: Changing Concepts of Race in Britain and the United States between the World Wars (Cambridge 1992)
John Jackson and Nadine Weidman, Race, Racism, and Science (Rutgers 2006)
Nancy Stepan, The Idea of Race in Science: Great Britain 1800-1960 (London 1982)
Michelle Brattain, “Race, Politics and Antiracism: UNESCO and the Politics of Presenting Science to the Postwar Public” American Historical Review 112 (2007), 1386-1413
H. Glenn Penny and Matti Bunzl, eds., Worldly Provincialism: German Anthropology in the Age of Empire (Ann Arbor 2003)
Paul Weindling, Health, Race and German Politics 1870-1945 (Cambridge 1989)
C. Loring Brace, "Race" Is a Four-Letter Word: The Genesis of the Concept (Oxford 2005)
Greetings to all,
>And I occasionally wonder how anthroposophists manage to read andenjoy fiction.
That is a really interesting question, on so many levels. I wonder, too. I'd like some information on what fictions anthroposophists read, if they do. Not that I wish to start, or have time for, a whole other big huge interesting topic, but if any of our anthro friends reading this care to chip in, it would be fascinating and thought-provoking.
Anthroposophists, if you're listening: do you read fiction? If so, what?
Mind you I am not making a judgment here. I really can't read fiction myself recently. I try, but I can't seem to follow a plot. I live in the nonfiction world now ...
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]