What Is Race?: Four Philosophical Views

by Joshua Glasgow, Sally Haslanger, Chike Jeffers

Across public discourse, in the media, politics, many branches of academic inquiry, and ordinary daily interactions, we spend a lot time talking about race relations, racial violence, discrimination based on race, racial integration, racial progress. It is fair to say that questions about race have vexed our social life. But for all we speak about race, do we know what race is? Is it a social construct or a biological object? Is it a bankrupt holdover from a time before sophisticated scientific understanding and genetics, or can it still hold up in biological, genetic, and other types of research? Most fundamentally, is race real?

In this book, four prominent philosophers and race theorists debate how best to answer these difficult questions, applying philosophical tools and the principles of social justice to cutting-edge findings from the biological and social sciences. Each presents a distinct view of Sally Haslanger argues that race is a socio-political reality. Chike Jeffers maintains that race is not only political but also, importantly, cultural. Quayshawn Spencer pursues the idea that race is biologically real. And Joshua Glasgow argues that either race is not real, or if it is, it must be real in a way that is neither social nor biological. Each offers an argument for their own view and then replies to the others. Woven together, the result is a lively debate that opens up numerous ways of understanding race. Above all, it is call for sophisticated and principled discussion of something that significantly permeates our lives.

Genres: Philosophy, Nonfiction, Race

296 pages, Hardcover

Published June 14, 2019

Reviews

[Jocelyn · Rating 4 out of 5]

Picked this up partially on my own interest and partially to survey for Philosopher Spouse to consider in the revamping of a philosophy of race course for undergraduates. It's structured in a useful way for teaching, with each author presenting a view in turn, followed by each author responding to the other three views.

The two social constructionist views are presented first: Haslanger's political constructionism and Jeffers' cultural constructionism. Spencer advances a non-essentialist biological realism, and Glasgow speaks for anti-realism.

The structure makes this particularly useful to non-philosophers; for those of us who are not philosophers, countering a well-constructed philosophical argument can be a real challenge. The collaborators' responses make this a richer volume and allow the non-expert reader to see where they have or haven't spotted openings for disputes and where their own views that align with the positions might be strong and weak.

I came away from this finding elements of most of the viewpoints persuasive, and I now feel equipped to identify by name, when encountered, arguments that align with each of them. That, I think, will aid me in finding good-faith conversations about race less adversarial by helping me mentally sort out some of the ways we talk past each other, using the same word but meaning different things.

That said, to get there, this book does require substantial concentration rather than casual reading. I've read all of it once and parts of it twice; I know I need to go over the remainder of it at least a second time eventually.

[S · Rating 4 out of 5]

A good read but a person of sound mind should finish it and feel like each person is missing something. I’m not wise enough to say what exactly is missing, but you’ll feel it too. I’d recommend taking notes and discussing it with a friend. It will open your eyes to different perspectives you probably wouldn’t have thought of before. At the same time, if you are reading this to get the answer to “What is Race,” you’re probably not going to find it in here. Also if you are looking for that answer, do yourself a favor and find a way you expose yourself to more real world diversity (not college), instead of finding it in a book.

[Nathan Ko · Rating 4 out of 5]

Though I enjoyed the whole book, I focused on the works of Sally Haslanger and Chike Jeffers the most. Those seem the most normative, and I believe that the ways they focused on the genesis of the concept of race as thoughtful. I always believed that race was a socio-political construct, but Jeffers makes great cases. I still wonder what Dorothy Roberts would have to say about Quayshawn Spencer.

[Stephanie Fish · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a serious philosophy book. It is definitely a challenging read for non-philosophy folks but I found it worth the effort.