-- Posted by cropduster at 2:58 pm on Nov. 15, 2008 Before commenting it would be best to do a little reading of these sites (plus any others you come across). Fair warning they could be a little boring for those not really interested in the subject. http://www.culturediversity.org/what is race.htm http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm There is also plenty of stuff out there to counter these arguments. So have a hunt and post that to. -- Posted by kidd rune at 8:01 pm on Nov. 15, 2008 Race is the differences between the various humans on Earth. Race is a biological concept. The classifications - not so much. Classification systems aren't natural properties of the world, but human inventions, which are defined by human beings, for the purpose of making information easier for other humans to access and pass on. Race is not hard to define, although definitions may change so as to not quite match what you see; in this case a wise man must accept the new scientific classifications. It doesn't take away the old guidelines. For example, people used to think dolphins were fish, and some people are still irate that we can't treat them as such, now that more advanced methods of classifying animals have put them in technically the same group as we people. -- Posted by cropduster at 8:14 pm on Nov. 15, 2008 Very vaild points there. However if race was not hard to define I doubt you see the amount of debate we see in the scientific community. When you speak of somebody's race what do you mean exactly? And how many race's are there exactly? -- Posted by kidd rune at 8:25 pm on Nov. 15, 2008 When you speak of somebody's race what do you mean exactly? Their similarities to those of the same race. And how many race's are there exactly? There is no real number. As I said - the classifications are a human invention. But, I usually see 5 - Caucasoid, Congoid, Capoid, Mongoloid, and Australoid.