The concept of race is one of the most controversial subjects of modern scientific and social studies. Despite the scientific ambiguities, there are still attempts to differentiate humans according to their place of living and race. According to the common understanding, the term “race” characterizes not only the skin type of the human being, but also religion, language, and nationality. In the USA, this issue stands acutely, because the society decided that there is no free space for the open-mindedness when it comes to the racial categories. However, no biological background exists that can warrant the term “race”. To prove the statement, it is important to find out what is the original meaning of the term and why is it inappropriate in the modern society.
The term "race" comes from Sanskrit, the ancient language of the Indo-Aryans, starting the time of the formation of this communit, when there was no concept of peoples in their modern sense, and when there were many national languages, which now make up the community. The biological unity of blood and habitat is in the fundamental nexus between people. Social, political, cultural, and religious differences arose much later and destroyed the community. Race is a universal criterion, based on which more complex evaluation categories subsequently folded (Graves Jr., 2009).
Thus, the term represents one of the fundamental concepts of the oldest language on earth because it dates back to the very beginning of the languages. When the Indo-Europeans began to compare the various things, there was the need in some kind of basic assessment category, the desired standard of perfection. Apparently in the depths of archetype the first time the word "race” appeared.
In biological science, the term “race” means the informal taxonomic rank which goes before the level of species. The distinguishing of races is made through the gene frequencies together with the personal characteristics of an objct (Stanford, Allen, & Anton, 2012). Nevertheless, these differences are relative, not absolute. The races also distinguish the species according to their habitat, geographical position, and different karyotypes in the chromosome.
It is obvious that talking about an outside world, people began to use the word “race” as primarily applied to their own brothers, and evaluated them with the help of people from neighboring and distant tribes. That is how this term filled with anthropological sense.
The common understanding of the race is almost completely formed through the mass media. These sources show the typical representatives of the “race”, for example, Egyptian or Indian culture but in fact, these individual differences are seldom found when one visits the country. Despite the fact that Chinese people have the other form of eyes than Indians, that is the feature due to the geographical and climatic conditions of residence of the specific representatives (Tatum & Perry, 2008).
In the modern society, this term concerns the physical characteristics of an individual. However, it is a controversial question. When the color of the skin type is taken, it is obvious that every human being has the different skin tone. Very often it depends on the climatic conditions one lives in. For example, Europeans and Chinese are different but their color type is more similar than Europeans’ and Africans’. In fact, the test of ABO blood group had shown that there is much more in common between the equatorial Africans and people who live in Europe despite the fact that they are very different. That is why this criterion cannot be relied on when we are talking about the race diversity but not from the biological or social point of view.
It is notable that nowadays the term “race” is opposite to the term “ethnic ancestry”. However, the second one is more suitable to differentiate the human beings on Earth. To name indivviduals according to the continent they live in (Eastern European, Southeast Asian, Northern African, etc.) is more appropriate than using the terms such as “Negroid” or “Mongoloid” (Stanford et al, 2012). Classifying humans according to the ethnic origin is more convenient and reasonable than differentiating them because of the form of the nose or the skin tone. Ethnic ancestry focuses on the common language, traditions, place of living, and evolution processes taken in the past.
The development of the human beings was influenced by the environmental and cultural changes. Now it is possible to distinguish different people from different part of the Earth according to their skeleton type or the form of their nose. However, that is just the clones that can change when one is taking the move to another place of living. In biological science it is claimed that the humankind was developed from a small group of people, so technically every human has the common ancestors. Evolution and social life made it necessary to differentiate every individual. However, this argument has to face changes according to the current processes of globalization.
After the World War II, humanity started to find the other ways in order to characterize the species. The term “race” appeared to be inappropriate and controversial. At least, in the meaning the modern society understood it. It is clear, that the process of defining the human beings only according to their accessory to the particular race now faces the violation of the fundamental human rights. For example, in the 2013 the Government of France decided to uproot the use of the word “race” in the official documents. That is the first significant step in understanding that the diversity of the humanity according to the race has neither biological, nor social background, and it is the relic of the past. If the humanity is the only creature that can think, so it has to use this possibility wisely and to value every specific feature of every group in the world.