-
9. Adaptive or not Adaptive, That is the Question
- Michigan State University Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
Chapter 9 ADAPTIVE OR NOT ADAPTIVE, 4 THA T IS THE QUESTION The question anthropologists of earlier generations never asked about what they called racial traits is a simple one: Are they adaptive or not adaptive? Not only have they assumed, and in some cases still assume,1 that racial traits exist, but they concluded that each trait had an adaptive value. What do scientists mean when they use the phrase "adaptive value?" In order for a trait to have adaptive value, it has to improve the adjustment of the individual to the environment in which he or she lives; it has to be inheritable, and it has to enable its possessor to leave behind more fertile offspring than individuals who do not possess it. But in spite of the best efforts of numerous scientists over many generations, no racial trait has ever been shown to be adaptive, not even skin color, the most heavily used trait by those who engage in race classification. For years, most observers assumed that dark-skinned individuals were favored by tropical climates and that light skinned individuals were favored by colder, less sunny climates, such as that of northwestern Europe. They were led to this assumption by the superficial observation that, in some parts of the world, but not in others, there appeared to be a small correlation between skin color and latitude, that is, the further a population is from the tropical region, the lighter its skin. From this general observation they were led to formulate hypotheses about how the so-called white race originated in western Europe and the black race in tropical Africa. The questions posed by this line of reasoning are, in the last analysis, inappropriate and false because they presuppose the existence of races and conclude that races are adapted to the environments in which they live. A far more appropriate line of inquiry would be, first, to abandon these presuppositions. Second, we should investigate the mechanism by which our bodies provide skin color, which is the chemical melanin, This pigment, which we all have in our skin, is beneficial. If melanin is beneficial, however, is the possession of large or small amounts 79 80 Alain Corcos beneficial in specific and seasonal environments? This question is appropriate because it poses at least a partial answer that has nothing to do with race. As to other racial traits, such as eye color, hair color, size of skull, form of hair, or shape of eyes, none has ever been shown to have given a comparative advantage to any individual or group. Most suggestions to the contrary have been speculative and often contradicted one another. This point was stressed by S. L. Washburn in his presidential address at the annual meeting of the American Anthropological Association, November 16, 1962: In the first place, in marked contrast to animals which are adapted to live in the arctic, large numbers of Mongoloids [Asians] are living in the hot, moist tropics. Altogether, unlike animal adaptation, then the people who are supposed to be adapted to the cold aren't living under cold conditions which are supposed to have produced them. They are presumed, as an arctic-adapted group following various laws, to have short extremities, flat noses, and to be stocky in build. They are, we might say, as stocky as the Scotch, as flat-nosed as the Norwegians, and as blond as the Eskimos. Actually there is no correlation, that is, none that has been well worked out, to support the notion that any of these racial groups is cold adapted.2 In this paragraph Washburn informs us there are animals that are adapted to cold weather but that no group of human beings is more cold adapted than any other. However, he does not suggest, or even hint, that there is something inherently wrong in trying to discover why some have characteristics that make them better adapted to hot or cold climates than others. For example, camels are adapted to life in desert regions. Grizzly bears, on the other hand, certainly could not survive in such places. However, to say that Eskimos are cold adapted or that dark-skinned Africans are adapted to tropical climates, we are talking about human populations, not separate species of human beings. Africans can survive in Alaska, Eskimos in Africa. The differences in adaptation, if they exist at all, are minimal. One wonders if those who looked for adaptation of human groups in fact considered human races to...