Sociobiology and race
Sociobiology is a field that examines the biological underpinnings of social behavior, particularly in humans, by exploring how genetic and environmental factors interact to shape behaviors that may enhance survival and reproduction. Originating in the 1970s through the work of Edward O. Wilson, sociobiology intersects biology, sociology, and psychology, proposing that social behaviors, including those related to race, can be understood through a biological lens. The discipline has faced significant criticism, particularly regarding its attempts to attribute human behavior and cultural differences to genetics, with notable opposition from scholars like Richard C. Lewontin, who argue that socio-economic factors and environmental conditions are more influential than biological determinism.
Sociobiologists have at times employed controversial concepts, such as IQ measurement and historical pseudosciences like phrenology, to discuss race-related behaviors. Critics assert that these approaches risk oversimplifying complex social characteristics and perpetuating outdated stereotypes. Importantly, modern genetics indicates that the genetic differences within socially defined racial groups are often greater than the differences between these groups, challenging the legitimacy of biological definitions of race. Despite these critiques, the notion that genetics may influence behavior remains a topic of interest, with debates centering on the extent of this influence and the role of race in these dynamics. Ultimately, sociobiology provides a framework for exploring human diversity, though its applications in race discussions have been contentious and warrant careful examination.
On this Page
Sociobiology and race
Sociobiology is the study of the biological basis of social behavior. Sociobiologists attempt to trace the origins of behavior to biological strategies for maximizing the survival and proliferation of genes. Biological determinants of group-level associative and discriminatory behaviors, including racial segregation, are among the variety of topics addressed by sociobiological theories.
Sociobiology emerged from earlier biosocial theories and ethnological principles largely because of the work of Edward O. Wilson of Harvard University in the 1970s. As a scientific discipline, sociobiology resides at the intersection of biology, sociology, and psychology, where practitioners are concerned with the biological underpinnings of human social behavior. Sociobiologists contend that social behavior can be explained, and ultimately predicted, by a thorough understanding of the interactions between the genetic composition of an organism and environmental constraints. Critics of sociobiology, notably Richard C. Lewontin of Harvard University, argue against the oversimplification of human behavior and the fatal error of explaining racial and cultural stereotypes according to biological measurements. Instead, he and other critics say, socioeconomic inequalities and differences in environmental quality are responsible for perpetuating social characteristics commonly found among racial aggregates.
Sociobiology is among several theories that have been proposed to explain variations in human culture and behavior on the basis of innate biological characteristics. At the core of these so-called biosocial theories is the inevitable challenge of resolving the complex interactions between nature and nurture, or in modern terminology, between genetic determinism and environmental determinism. Early biosocial theories concerned with racial differences included phrenology, the pseudoscience of measuring cranial dimensions as a way of predicting racial identity and behavior. The reemergence of interest in the intelligence quotient (IQ) measurement is based on biosocial theories of innate and racially determined differences in cognitive abilities essential for succeeding in a technologically driven society. At the extreme end of genetic determinism in the continuum of behavioral gene-environment interactions reside the discredited tenets of eugenics. Eugenicists advocate the purification of the human genetic stock by curbing the reproduction of allegedly inferior genotypes, which tend to be disproportionately identified among racial minority groups.
At the other end of the gene-environment continuum, staunch environmentalists declare that human racial identities are based entirely on social and cultural prejudices lacking any basis in biological parameters. Indeed, modern genetic measurements show that molecular similarities that exist between socially defined racial groups are typically larger than differences between these groups. Therefore, all biosocial theories about racial characteristics and behavior are fundamentally flawed because there is no credible biological definition of race. However, the idea that genes can affect behavior in some capacity has gained widespread acceptance. It is the extent of the relationship and the unclear role of other factors, including the concept of race, that remains controversial.
Scholars primarily concerned with ranking human races in terms of inferiority or superiority have used sociobiology theories erroneously to support their controversial points of view. Speculations about poorly characterized molecular determinants of racial differences in innate intelligence, violent behavior, and sexual characteristics have stunted scientific progress toward understanding the diversity of human cultural and behavioral characteristics. Ultimately, scientific understanding of race relations may not depend at all on measurable biological determinants, but sociobiology offers one way to appreciate human diversity.
In 2005, the Wilson Biodiversity Foundation was established to sustainably support all life and Earth’s biodiversity while honoring Wilson’s pioneering work and his ability to find common ground with other scientists. However, following Wilson’s death in 2021, it was revealed that Wilson had a professional relationship with and supported the known racist and discredited former psychology professor J. Philippe Rushton. The discovery of Wilson’s support of Rushton led to many of Wilson’s works being labeled racist and deleted from many academic publications. These findings further supported critics of the theories of sociobiology and race.
Bibliography
Ansell, Amy Elizabeth. Race and Ethnicity: The Key Concepts. Routledge, 2013.
Barkow, Jerome Harvey. Missing the Revolution: Darwinism for Social Scientists. Oxford UP, 2006.
Ehrlich, Paula J. "A Statement on E.O. Wilson and the J. Philippe Rushton Correspondence." E.O. Wilson Biodiversity Foundation, 15 Feb. 2022, eowilsonfoundation.org/eow/a-statement-on-e-o-wilson-and-the-j-philippe-rushton-correspondence. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Murray, Charles A. Human Diversity: The Biology of Gender, Race, and Class. Twelve, 2020.
Schulson, Michael. "New Evidence Revives Old Questions about E.O. Wilson and Race." Undark, 16 Feb. 2022, undark.org/2022/02/16/new-evidence-revives-old-questions-about-e-o-wilson-and-race. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
van den Berghe, Pierre L. “Race and Ethnicity: A Sociobiological Perspective.” Ethnic and Racial Studies, vol. 1, no. 4, 1978, pp. 401–11, doi.org/10.1080/01419870.1978.9993241. Accessed 10 Dec. 2024.
Wilson, Edward O. Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. 25th anniversary ed., Harvard UP, 2002.
Yudell, Michael. Race Unmasked: Biology and Race in the Twentieth Century. Columbia UP, 2014.