{"id":39057,"date":"2014-12-23T15:35:06","date_gmt":"2014-12-23T15:35:06","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.mixedracestudies.org\/wordpress\/?p=39057"},"modified":"2014-12-23T15:44:40","modified_gmt":"2014-12-23T15:44:40","slug":"the-uncanny-return-of-the-race-concept","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/mixedracestudies.org\/wp\/?p=39057","title":{"rendered":"The uncanny return of the race concept"},"content":{"rendered":"

The uncanny return of the race concept<\/strong><\/em><\/a><\/p>\n

Frontiers in Human Neuroscience<\/a>
\nVolume 8, 2014-11-04
\nDOI: 10.3389\/fnhum.2014.00836<\/a><\/p>\n

Andreas Heinz<\/strong><\/a>
\nDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
\nCharit\u00e9\u2014University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany<\/em><\/p>\n

Daniel J. M\u00fcller<\/strong><\/a>, Associate Professor of Psychiatry
\nCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
\nDepartment of Psychiatry
\nUniversity of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada<\/em><\/p>\n

S\u00f6ren Krach<\/strong><\/a>
\nDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
\nPhilipps-University Marburg, Marburg, Germany<\/em><\/p>\n

Maurice Cabanis<\/strong>
\nCenter for Mental Health, Klinikum Stuttgart, Stuttgart, Germany<\/em><\/p>\n

Ulrike P. Kluge<\/strong>
\nDepartment of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy
\nCharit\u00e9\u2014University Medicine Berlin, Berlin, Germany<\/em><\/p>\n

The aim of this Hypothesis and Theory<\/em> is to question the recently increasing use of the \u201crace\u201d concept in contemporary genetic, psychiatric, neuroscience as well as social studies. We discuss \u201crace\u201d and related terms used to assign individuals to distinct groups and caution that also concepts such as \u201cethnicity\u201d or \u201cculture\u201d unduly neglect diversity. We suggest that one factor contributing to the dangerous nature of the \u201crace\u201d concept is that it is based on a mixture of traditional stereotypes about \u201cphysiognomy\u201d, which are deeply imbued by colonial traditions. Furthermore, the social impact of \u201crace classifications\u201d will be critically reflected. We then examine current ways to apply the term \u201cculture\u201d and caution that while originally derived from a fundamentally different background, \u201cculture\u201d is all too often used as a proxy for \u201crace\u201d, particularly when referring to the population of a certain national state or wider region. When used in such contexts, suggesting that all inhabitants of a geographical or political unit belong to a certain \u201cculture\u201d tends to ignore diversity and to suggest a homogeneity, which consciously or unconsciously appears to extend into the realm of biological similarities and differences. Finally, we discuss alternative approaches and their respective relevance to biological and cultural studies.<\/p>\n

TABLE OF CONTENTS<\/strong><\/p>\n