Classification of Human Beings - Research Paper Example

 History on Human Classification This paper discusses the question about how the human classification started. The paper will discuss the ways in which humans are classified and the different classification suggested by various anthropologists and psychologists over the period of the time are also discussed. The discussion also includes the various methods of skull measuring and the history of classifying the difference between the skulls of the three major groups of human: whites, blacks, and Asians.   How Did The Human Classification Start? Humans originated in the East Africa what we call the ‘stone age’. It was the end of this age when a drastic change in the culture occurred among human beings. Human beings capability to think in rational ways and to differentiate things is the basis for the classification of humans (Fordor, 1983). The classification and differences in terms of appearance include both the differences in ancestry and also differences in the physical appearance and traits. The most important of all the factors which is the basis for classification of human beings and which lead to racism and ethnicity are the differences in the color of skin and hair texture of various human beings (Benedict, 2009). Researches show that the place from where the humans originated is the place where most genetically diverse human beings are found (Fordor, 1983). These differences are not very significant. Therefore, the classification of human is also based on the variation in culture or ethnic group. The ethnic groups have different language, culture, region, ancestors etc. The kinship and self identification is what the basis for ethnic group is. The color terminology classifies human beings into the following human races (Sherwood, 2007): 1. Black (Humans from the Sub-Saharan Africa) 2. White (Humans from Europe) 3. Red (Humans native to America) 4. Yellow (Humans from East Asia) These were defined as a ‘race’ in the old years. In modern world, these are called the ‘ethnic groups’. These groups are differentiated also by their skulls. The history of classification of these skulls and the method used to measure skulls is discussed next. Measuring Method of the Skull The method used to measure the skull is known as ‘Phrenology’. This method is based on the fact that the brain is an organ of mind and that the various minds have differences in functions based on their locations and regions (Fordor, 1983). These localized differences in functions are known as the ‘modularity of mind’. This method was started by the German physician Franz Joseph Gall in 1796. It is termed as pseudoscience in the modern era. For the phrenologists, the mind consisted of various mental faculties each of which represents a different area of the brain. Phrenologists believed that the cranial bone matched accordingly with the different sizes of these particular areas of the brain in diverse individuals (Benedict, 2009). Thus, a human's capacity for a given individuality, character and behavior could be determined by measuring the area of the skull that is corresponding to the specific area of the brain. There are other ways of measuring skull as well. These include Craniometry which measures the skull size, weight, shape and other physical attributes of the skull; and Physiognomy which studies the facial features of the human beings. Craniometry which measures the bones of skull is based on the classification of race. We refer to these races as the white, black and Asian ethnic groups. But at that time, these were referred to as various races by Georges Vacher de Lapouge in the 19th century (Fordor, 1983). Charles Darwin also used this method of measuring skull in his study of skeletons which was the basis of his theory of evolution. Samuel George Morton was the person who initiated a study by collecting hundreds of bones from the entire world and classified them according to a criterion which was the basis of differentiating among people at that time i.e. classifying according to the ‘race’ (Sherwood, 2007). The cranial capacity was termed as the volume of the interior of the skull. This measured the intellectual capacity of a human and thus classified him to be belonging to the particular race. There were a number of results that he concluded through his study about various races based on the premise that a high cranial capacity is built in a large skull and vice versa. In ‘Crania Americana’ he concluded the following (Sherwood, 2007): 1. Whites (Mean Cranial capacity = 87 in³) 2. Blacks (Mean Cranial capacity = 78 in³) 3. Native Americans (Mean Cranial capacity = 82 in³) This measure of skulls of different races was later criticized by a number of scientists and anthropologists and these measures were also revised by certain anthropologists and physiologists. But this study was the basis of classification of human beings based on their dimensions of skull. Critical Evaluation Anthropologists have placed great emphasis on the race. Race is considered to be a societal phenomenon and a cultural construct rather than being a genetic variation. The critics to the classification of human beings based on their skulls and races state that the differentiating of human based on races does not stand valid because these differentiations are not genetically discrete (Benedict, 2009). Another criticism is also that these measurements are not very reliable and also that measuring skulls and depicting races from them is not scientifically meaningful. The variations in human genes were also found to be present before the time when East Africa people migrated to other continents and regions. Therefore, the researches criticize that these variations of race were there in the same set of people living in East Africa and therefore these cannot be characterized as genetic differences but rather biological differences among human beings which do not classify them into specific races (Fordor, 1983). The critical analysis of human classification does conclude that the human beings can be classified in terms of their demographics and the ways in which they interact and the way in which they relate to one another. But the modern ethnic groups’ differences are more prominently based on the premise that the different ethnic group be classified into different social class, language, religion, region, culture etc. This basis of classification of human beings, as suggested by the critics does not conform to the classification based on the measurement of skulls of different races. The methods for measuring skull and the differences in the whites, blacks and Asians based on their measurement of skull was also revised later and the measurements were found to be somewhat different. The key in measuring skulls was the point of measurement where the different races would differentiate from each other and become belonging to the other race at that particular point (Sherwood, 2007). At present, there is no such exact cut-off present. This is probably due to the fact that the racial discrimination has increased and Africans living in America can have minds who think like Americans and thus a different skull size. It has become difficult to differentiate due to the increased globalization. Thus, in a nutshell, the history and origin of human classification, the basis for classification of human beings and the ways in which the classification of human beings is made is found to have different perspectives with regards to different anthropologists, psychologists and researchers. The measuring method of skull has also a number of unconformities when kept in a modern setting as the groups are more diverse now and the classifications do not hold to some extent in recent times according to the researchers. Thus, the origins and classification of human beings are still present in the recent times which reflect their classification was based on thorough studies and researches. Works Cited Benedict Lincoln. Human Analysis: Classification of Human Beings. BiblioBazaar, LLC, 2009. Fodor, Jerry A. Modularity of Mind: An Essay on Faculty Psychology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 1983. Sherwood Larned Washburn. Classification and Human Evolution. Aldine Transaction Publishers, 2007. Read More