This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers.
In the current essay I would like to describe what I have learned about race and social science. Race - is the system of human populations, characterized by the similarity of the complex inheritance of certain biological characteristics, with the outer phenotypic expression and formed in a particular geographic region.Â Features that characterize the different races often appear as a result of adaptation to different environmental conditions, which took place over many generations.Â
The criterion of distinction of race on the form is the absence of significant barriers to create fertile offspring, which leads to the formation of many transitional forms of miscegenation.Â The concept of "race" in general, more or less clearly perceived by different researchers, but in detail there are significant differences, different schools of anthropologists were isolated from four to seven major races and dozens of small anthropological types.
Racial classifications are grouped according to the human population, racial types of individuals or features characteristic of populations.Â They differ in the principles of construction and the data is used in included groups and underlying characteristics.Â
Up until the present in the anthropological literature classification of human races occupied a significant place trying to build more and more complete and objective.Â They are mostly based on morphology.Â The issue is still actively debated among the major races, as described in Race: a history beyond black and white.
Virtually, all schemes of racial classifications must stand at least three general groups (three big races): Mongoloid, Negroid, and Caucasians, although the names of these groups may vary.Â So, sometimes they are called Mongoloid Asian or Asian-American race, Negroid - equatorial or Australian-Negroid, Caucasoid or Eurasian.Â Sometimes the big races are allocated as Australoids, Indians, Bushmen and Hottentots, at least - Polynesian, Kuril race (the Ainu) and Lapps, or Saami.
There are many opinions about how many races can be distinguished within the species Homo sapiens.Â Existing points of view range from the hypothesis of two major racial types up to 15 independent hypotheses of races.Â Typological concept of race historically comes first.Â According to the typological approach, describing the features of a particular person can be clearly attributed to a particular race: racial types are distinguished, and each individual is evaluated by the degree of approximation to this or that 'pure' type.Â For example, the width of the lips and nose of more than a certain size, combined with low head-pointer, a large protrusion of the face forward, darker skin than a certain standard model is regarded as a sign of belonging to the Negroid race.Â This scheme can even determine the race of a particular person.Â The complexity of the typological concept involves the separation of "pure" types, and it is distinctly different from one another.Â Depending on the number of types and attributes that are defined as race will also vary the racial identification of the person.Â Moreover, the consistent application of strict typological principle leads to the fact that siblings can be attributed to different races, as described in Race: the history of an idea in America.
Population concept of race. In today's research considering race is dominated the population concept of race.Â Race is perceived as a set of populations, not individuals.Â The race is considered as a separate entity having its own structure.Â
There are different types of race:
Western type- Europoids.Â Natural habitat Caucasians - from Europe to the Urals, North Africa, Southwest Asia and the Indian subcontinent.Â Include the Nordic, Mediterranean, Alpine, East Baltic, and other subgroups.Â This type differs from other races, especially with the strong profiling individuals.Â The remaining symptoms vary widely.Â
Negroid. The representatives of blacks - are native Kenyan.Â Natural habitat - Central, West and East Africa.Â Characteristic differences - curly hair, dark skin, dilated nostrils, thick lips, etc. Provided the eastern subgroup (tall) and western subgroup (Negro type, round-headed, middle-sized).Of special note is a group of Pygmies, as described in Race: a history beyond black and white.Â
Pygmies. Natural habitat pygmies - the western part of Central Africa.Â Growth is from 144 to 150 cm for men, skin is light brown, curly hair, dark lips rather thin, large torso, arms and legs are short, the physical type can be classified as a special race.Â Possible number of pygmies can be from 40 to 200 thousand people.Â
Kapoids, the Bushmen. Kapoids (Bushmen, Khoisan race).Â Natural habitat - South Africa.Â Stunted, with infantile features.Â They are very short and have curled hair.Â Skin is yellowish-brown, not elastic - quickly appear wrinkles, droops fold over the pubis. Special fold-century, prominent cheekbones and a yellowish skin attached to the Bushmen some resemblance to the Mongoloids.Â This occurred in parallel to adapt to life in similar conditions semi-desert.Â
Eastern. Race east barrel is characterized by two differences: a greater evolutionary archaic and high migration.Â This is due to the geographical features of eastern fire.Â The abundance of geographic barriers - the seas, mountains, great rivers, as well as the shelves are in a period of glaciation that were naked, then fired up, gave an advantage over migration groups.Â And in terms of dispersion of the population factor of infantilization forged the modern man to act less.
Mongoloids are originally inhabited by Eastern Eurasia, formed on the territory of modern Mongolia. Appearance reflects an adaptation to the conditions of deserts (the Gobi desert - one of the largest deserts in the world by area, located in Mongolia and northern China, the territory which is mainly inhabited by Mongolians).Â The main feature - is the eye protection from high insolation, dust, cold, etc. For this there are narrow slit eyelids, extra fold - epicanthus, darker iris, thick eyelashes, prominent cheekbones with cushions of fat, long (unless cut) lines and blackÂ hair.Â There are identified two contrasting groups: the northern (solid, tall, fair-skinned, with a large face, low cranial vault) and southern (short, swarthy, little face and high forehead).Â This contrast is caused by factors of infantilization in crowded southern regions.Â Young race is about 12 thousand years.Â
American race. Americanoid race - is a race, prevalent in North and South America.Â Americanoids are characterized by straight black hair and an aquiline nose.Â They have black eyes, wider than the Asian Mongoloids, but narrower than in Caucasians, as described in Race: the history of an idea in America.Â
Australoids. Australoids (Australian-Oceanic race).Â It is an ancient race, which had a huge area bounded by the regions: the Indian subcontinent, Tasmania, Hawaii, Kurile Islands (that is, almost half the globe).Â It is widely displaced and mixed with the migrants.Â It includes groups: Polynesian, Melanesian, Australian, the Ainu.Â Features of the exterior of indigenous Australians is characterized by the light brown skin tones, large nose, long wavy hair, burnable as tow a massive frontal bone, powerful jaws sharply distinguish them from African Negroids.Â
Belonging to the form of Homo sapiens, people of every race are able to master all the achievements of culture.Â The most archaic (preserving the ancient characteristics of morphology) are Australoids. Each race in its own way is better suited for survival in a specific context: the Eskimos in arctic deserts and Nilotic peoples - in the savannahs.Â However, in an era of civilization, such opportunities appear from all races.Â Nevertheless, the facts relating to racial physiology, continues to exert its influence on people's lives.
In this part of the essay I would like to describe what I have learned about the social science. Social sciences represent a major classification group, with the corresponding:Â
a) in the context of epistemology - one of three main areas of scientific knowledge, along with science and philosophy.Â
b) in the context of the utilitarian task management and planning of the educational process, the organizational structure of schools, categorization, and categorization of areas of science for applied purposes (for example, bibliographies, see UDC) - a set of disciplines, compiled on the basis of the object (object) of study: relevance toÂ society, its social groups and individuals, as described in Philosophy of Social Science.
In this part of the essay I would like to describe the peculiarities of the theories of Karl Marx, Plato and Michel Foucault. Social sciencesÂ were germinatedÂ inÂ nineteenth-century Europe, butÂ in the twentieth century, due toÂ theÂ worksÂ ofÂ KarlÂ Marx,Â EmileÂ DurkheimÂ and
Â MaxÂ WeberÂ social science wasÂ developed.Â TheÂ flagshipÂ wasÂ the sociologyÂ neologismÂ createdÂ by FrenchmanÂ Auguste Comte,Â his first teacher. DurkheimÂ andÂ hisÂ peersÂ excel inÂ searchÂ ofÂ rulesÂ ofÂ methodÂ to elevateÂ theÂ scientific status ofÂ knowledgeÂ about society.Â Marx, byÂ contrast,Â frowned uponÂ by hisÂ peersÂ inÂ the working classÂ wasÂ to findÂ its identity.Â TheÂ atrocitiesÂ ofÂ labor relationsÂ at the time caused him toÂ assign toÂ thisÂ socialÂ group,Â as defined aboveÂ in relationÂ to theÂ capitalist economic system, sometimesÂ theÂ forceÂ of the transformation ofÂ society,Â sometimes justÂ aÂ piece of theÂ complexÂ puzzleÂ of history, as stated in How Does Social Science Work?: Reflections on Practice.Â
Michel Foucault is very popular in USA, Japan, Australia and Europe.Â The creative legacy of Michel Foucault was not perceived unambiguously.Â Political scientists rank him it to political scientists, sociologists - to sociologists and historians - to the historians.Â However, if you still reckon Foucault to philosophers, can be said the following: Foucault's philosophizing is beyond the traditional philosophical territory, but it raises philosophical questions.Â This is due to personal reasons and the specifics of his education and interests (the study of psychiatry, a politicized consciousness).Â Foucault was always in the creative search.Â Each of his works, even if the total line is traced, it is unlikely and almost never repeats a previous study.Â Sometimes, some nuances are changing even definitions of basic concepts.Â Foucault - is a historian of the present.Â He is a thinker, thinking through the story.Â Before his study of Foucault has the following objectives:Â to recreate the archeology of modern knowledge about the subject, decipher the genealogy of modern power and the whole of modern western civilizationÂ and to write a particular ontology of the present, which is thought of crossing region of the other three ontologies: the ontology of the subject in its relation to itself, the ontology of the subject in its relation to other people and institutions in the field of power, the ontology of the subject in its relation to the truth in the field of knowledge.
Karl Heinrich Marx is a German philosopher, sociologist, economist, political journalist and social activist.Â His work has shaped the philosophy of dialectical and historical materialism, in economics - the theory of surplus value in politics - the theory of class struggle.Â These areas became the basis of communist and socialist movement became known as "Marxism."
As a philosopher, Marx's views were formed largely under the influence of papers by Hegel.Â At the heart of Hegel's ideas lay the opposition of "subjective spirit" (individual), "objective spirit" (a system of conditions and conventions that separate man from God) and "absolute spirit" (in terms of religion - "God" in terms of Plato - "Â ideas, but in terms of Neoplatonists - "One").Â Hegel believed that the move of his thought can be built up the level of subjective thinking at the level of absolute speculation, for example, the level of God, overcoming the system of objective limitations and separations.Â This movement of Hegel is called "the phenomenology of spirit", and the logic of this movement "dialectic."Â Marx is very deep to absorb this idea of the absolute, the upcoming single person on the system of objective constraints standing in the way to a single "absolute" and that the development of absolute peace and development are possible primarily through the work of the human mind, for example, throughÂ dialectic, as described in How to build social science theories.Â
At the same time, the views of Karl Marx's ideas had a marked influence of materialism, in particular the ideas of Ludwig Feuerbach.Â Interest in Marx's materialism was manifested already in his dissertation on the ancient Greek atomism. There is a wide range of personality assessments as Karl Marx himself used in his public role and his scientific contribution to the philosophy and sociology.Â
During the lifetime of Marx, among the authors of the ideas of Marx was proclaimed a genius, and others were subjected to severe criticism.Â Much of the work of Marx was devoted to the controversy with opponents.Â Having a substantial national modernization, the ideas of Marx became the nucleus of a number of ideologies of the revolutionary movements of the XX century and had a great influence on the course of world history, in XIX-XX centuries.Â
There are other points of view on an assessment of its role in the history of science, but we can not recognize the enormous influence exerted by his ideas on the course of world history, XIX-XX centuries.
PlatoÂ is a GreekÂ philosopher,Â studentÂ of Socrates,Â teacherÂ of Aristotle. The main method of knowledge Plato calls dialectic, which he defines as the knowledge of the essence of things themselves.Â In the dialog "The State" sides come to a conclusion and are engaged in the dialectic only one who try to argue, he is bypassing the sensation through the mind alone, rushes to the essence of any subject and does not recede, until by the very thought does not comprehend the essence of good.Â So it appears at the top of intelligible, just as the other climbed to the top of the visible.Â In our everyday understanding of the dialectic - it is only the art of reasoning in communication, especially during the dispute.Â For Plato, in the ordinary sense of the word it was important to emphasize the moment of a comprehensive review of the things.
The essence of a person saw in his eternal and immortal soul entering the body at birth.Â In this, Plato saw the generic (general) kind, unlike the animal.Â And at the species (private) level man differs from animals by their external characteristics.Â On the basis of these differences, Plato formulated one of the first definitions of human nature:Â man being wingless, two-legged, flat nails, receptive to the knowledge-based reasoning.Â Of course, Plato is no absolute opposition to animals and humans.Â Due to the fact that the human soul is immortal and the body is perishable, the person - is dualistic. In this dualistic laid the eternal tragedy - the body pulls the man in the animal world, and the soul - the divine.Â