Biological Theory

, Volume 8, Issue 1, pp 114–120 | Cite as

Biological Theory and the Metaphysics of Race: A Reply to Kaplan and Winther

Long Article


In Kaplan and Winther’s recent article (Biol Theory. doi: 10.1007/s13752-012-0048-0, 2012) they argue for three bold theses: first, that “it is illegitimate to read any ontology about ‘race’ off of biological theory or data”; second, that “using biological theory to ground race is a pernicious reification”; and, third, that “race is fundamentally a social rather than a biological category.” While Kaplan and Winther’s theses are thoughtful, I show that the arguments that their theses rest on are unconvincing. In order to be constructive, I go on to show exactly how one can use biological theory and data to legitimately infer an ontological view of race, to infer a biological view of race that is not a reification, and to argue that race is both socially constructed and biologically real.


Biodiversity Biological theory Genetics Kinds Ontology Race 



I would like to thank Joshua Glasgow, Manuel Vargas, and Rasmus Winther for helpful discussions that led to the creation and revision of this article. I would also like to thank the Bay Area Philosophy of Race (BAPR) reading group for organizing the talk by Rasmus Winther that generated the idea to write this paper. This research was funded by a Ford Foundation Postdoctoral Fellowship, and a University of San Francisco Fellowship Matching Stipend.


  1. Andreasen RO (1998) A new perspective on the race debate. Br J Philos Sci 49:199–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andreasen RO (2005) The meaning of ‘race’: folk conceptions and the new biology of race. J Philos 102:94–106Google Scholar
  3. Appiah KA (1996) Race, culture, identity, misunderstood connections. In: Gutmann KA (ed) Color conscious. Princeton University Press, Princeton, pp 30–105Google Scholar
  4. Blum L (2002) I’m not a racist but…: the moral quandary of race. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  5. Burchard E, Ziv E, Coyle N, Gomez S, Tang H, Karter A et al (2003) The importance of race and ethnic background in biomedical research and clinical practice. N Engl J Med 348:1170–1175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cavalli-Sforza L, Menozzi P, Piazza A (1994) The history and geography of human genes. Princeton University Press, PrincetonGoogle Scholar
  7. Duhem P (1981) The aim and structure of physical theory. Atheneum, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  8. Duster T (2005) Race and reification in science. Science 307:1050–1051CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gannett L (2010) Questions asked and unasked: how by worrying less about the ‘really real’ philosophers of science might better contribute to debates about genetics and race. Synthese 177:363–385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Glasgow J (2009) A theory of race. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  11. Gould SJ (1996) The mismeasure of man. Norton, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Harper W (2002) Newton’s argument for universal gravitation. In: Cohen IB, Smith GE (eds) The Cambridge companion to Newton. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 174–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Haslanger S (2008) A social constructionist analysis of race. In: Koenig BA, Lee SS, Richardson SS (eds) Revisiting race in a genomic age. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick, pp 56–69Google Scholar
  14. Haslanger S (2010) Language, politics, and “the folk”: looking for “the meaning” of ‘race.’ Monist 93:169–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kaplan J, Winther R (2012) Prisoners of abstraction? the theory and measure of genetic variation, and the very concept of “race.” Biol Theory. doi: 10.1007/s13752-012-0048-0
  16. Kendig C (2011) Race as a physiosocial phenomenon. Hist Philos Life Sci 33:191–222Google Scholar
  17. Kitcher P (1999) Race, ethnicity, biology, culture. In: Harris L (ed) Racism: key concepts in critical theory. Humanity Books, Amherst, pp 87–117Google Scholar
  18. Maglo KN, Martin LJ (2012) Researching vs. reifying race: the case of obesity research. Humana Mente J Philos Stud 22:111–143Google Scholar
  19. Mills C (1998) Blackness visible: essays on philosophy and race. Cornell University Press, IthacaGoogle Scholar
  20. Newton I (1999) The Principia: mathematical principles of natural philosophy (Bernard Cohen IB, Whitman A, trans). University of California Press, Berkeley/StanfordGoogle Scholar
  21. Outlaw L (1990) Toward a critical theory of “race.” In: Goldberg DT (ed) Anatomy of racism. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, pp 58–82Google Scholar
  22. Rosenberg N, Mahajan S, Ramachandran S, Zhao C, Pritchard J, Feldman M (2005) Clines, clusters, and the effect of study design on the inference of human population structure. PLoS Genet 1(6):660–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Rosenberg N, Pritchard J, Weber J, Cann H, Kidd K, Zhivotovsky L et al (2002) Genetic structure of human populations. Science 298:2381–2385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Sesardic N (2010) Race: a social destruction of a biological concept. Biol Philos 25:143–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Spencer Q (2004) Do Newton’s rules of reasoning guarantee truth… Must they? Stud Hist Philos Sci A 35:759–782CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Spencer Q (2009) Is cladistic race a genuine kind? PhD Thesis, Stanford University, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  27. Spencer Q (2012) What ‘biological racial realism’ should mean. Philos Stud 159:181–204CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Stein H (1990) “From the phenomena of motions to the forces of nature”: hypothesis or deduction? PSA Proc Biennial Meet Philos Sci Assoc 1990(2):209–222Google Scholar
  29. Tang H, Quertermous T, Rodriguez B, Kardia S, Zhu X, Brown A et al (2005) Genetic structure, self-identified race/ethnicity, and confounding in case–control association studies. Am J Hum Genet 76:268–275CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zack N (2002) Philosophy of science and race. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Konrad Lorenz Institute for Evolution and Cognition Research 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyStanford UniversityStanfordUSA

Personalised recommendations