Role of Race in Forensic Anthropology

Paper Summary:

This paper looks at arguments for and against the use of race as a defining factor in forensic anthropology. It explains that some schools of thought argue that race should not be a factor, but scientists should rather view a skeleton as an independent human being. It discusses how others explain that determining a person's race from the remains often assists in solving a crime or mystery. Specific biology data and graphs are included in this paper to help understand these concepts.

From the Paper:

"All agree that all human beings belong to the same biological species, Homo sapiens, which means that all are capable of reproducing without barriers. In reality, however, people are restricted to those known to them when looking for a reproductive partner. As a result of this, in some areas, people of like characteristics tend to cluster together. Over time, then, geographic areas can vary even when the people who live in those areas all appear to be of the same ancestry. However, the issue of race also has important cultural and moral issues. In the past, human variation divided into "races" was viewed as a given, which each race distinct from other ones (Shreeve, 1994). While anthropologists as a group did not support the use of these differences as a way to sort people into some who were better than others, the view assisted those who wanted to assert such claims, insist that the races should be kept separate, and commit any number of social abominations in the name of race, and especially, racial purity."

More papers on Role of Race in Forensic Anthropology:

• Research Paper # 63007 : "The Continuing Role of Race in Capital Cases"
• Term Paper # 141148 : "The Role of Race in Criminality"
• Research Paper # 146990 : "The Role of Insects in Crimes"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: