Comments on: On Human Genetic Variation and Human Identity

By: trinity

trinity — Thu, 13 Nov 2008 18:39:01 +0000

Theses are questions

1:Areas of overlapping human identity?
2:Anthropogical proot of cultural universility?
3:Religious proof of cultural universalism?
4:What in cultural universalism?

By: The Genetics Of “Who’s Your Daddy?” « Anthropology.net

The Genetics Of “Who’s Your Daddy?” « Anthropology.net — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:32:43 +0000

[...] name and Y chromosome type. We already know that in deep ancestries, like among Jewish people, the Cohen Modal Haplotype (CMH) is notably frequent amongst Cohens. Cohens are a lineage of Jews believed to be direct [...]

By: Recent Nature and Science papers on Patterns in Human Genetic Variation « Anthropology.net

Tue, 26 Feb 2008 03:07:10 +0000

[...] really happy these three papers came out when they did. Fresh on my mind, is still that one discussion on human genetic identity and human genetic variation. Ancestry and identity are two terms that [...]

By: Native American Anthropologist

Native American Anthropologist — Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:31:03 +0000

I would have to agree with Martin R. on this one. There are many attempts to use genetic data to build cultural groups, but beyond a broad categorization process it seems very hard to do in any realistic sense. This is especially true from my area of focus, Native North America, where there are only 5 haplogroups currently designated, which tells us something about the biology of the first Native Americans (and possibly their distant ancestors in Asia), but little about the cultural groups these biological groups belong to.

By: Fighting the mantra, “People vary more within the groups than vary between groups” « Anthropology.net

Fri, 18 Jan 2008 07:46:40 +0000

[...] Razib and Martin, I recently took arms and battled the concepts of behind race and identity and how human genetic variation plays a role in forming these concepts. In the comments, I was disgusted to read Martin throw in [...]

By: Kambiz

Kambiz — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:24:45 +0000

Eric, a very simple Google search would lead you to this American Antiquity publication, "Matrilocality, Corporate Strategy, and the Organization of Production in the Chacoan World" by Peter N. Peregrine. There is one study that challenged this conclusion, here's the link but Peregrine defended his work in a response.

By: eric

eric — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 09:59:21 +0000

I’m curious about your reference to Chaco Canyon. My understanding is that a great deal about Anasazi social structures is still “up in the air,” and the link to Wiki . . . doesn’t tell me much. Are there additional sources I should look at?

By: razib

razib — Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:35:02 +0000

racist!!!

By: Kambiz

Kambiz — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 23:41:17 +0000

Martin, I wrote this post. I did read your entry and understand that you think identity and genetic data are less related than I am arguing for. The relationship is not that complicated, and it need not be argued that it is complicated. If people who identify as descendants of the biblical Aaron, and follow the patrilineal Jewish priestly culture known as Kohanim but also have a unique genetic haplotype that matches this identity then where’s the complication?

By: Martin R

Martin R — Wed, 16 Jan 2008 21:35:40 +0000

People who read the entry of mine that you link to will find that I am not in fact hostile to genetic data. I'm just saying that genes are one thing, language another and ethnic identity a third. Their interrelationships are complicated. As for the "biological basis for race", there is no need for any bullying to give that idea a very low status. Genetics have long ago shown that people vary more within the major racial groups than these groups vary among themselves. I'm really surprised by an entry like this appearing here. Who wrote it?