Jump to content

Talk:Scientific racism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Is CRT a political or intellectual movement?

[edit]

It says at the top of the page: ""Race theory" redirects here. For the intellectual movement and framework, see Critical race theory."

I thought CRT was a political movement more than an intellectual one, although of course it has both political and intellectual aspects. Your thoughts would be most welcome. Polar Apposite (talk) 05:34, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's an interdisciplinary academic framework for analysis, as explained in the well-sourced article Critical race theory. Like several other academic areas (e.g., environmental science, epidemiology) the conclusions of CRT research can often lead to changes in policy and have political consequences. NightHeron (talk) 08:53, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No mention of James Watson?

[edit]

James Watson can probably be included in the 'After 1945' section, with sources like this and books. Zenomonoz (talk) 03:25, 30 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Misleading title

[edit]

"Scientific racism" implies that there is scientific evidence that some races are superior to others. There is not. I recommend a change from "scientific racism" to "pseudoscientific racism" or even "biological racism." Thank you. 71.221.194.121 (talk) 00:35, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For better or worse, that is its common name in reliable sources (which do not give it any credence as science). Wikipedia doesn't invent new terminology. See WP:COMMONNAME.Acroterion (talk) 00:43, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Biological racism" sounds worse than the current title. For good or bad, racist differentiations were within the realm of acceptable scientific views during the 19th century through at least the 1920s (the publication of the infamous Robert Yerkes WW1 U.S. Army test results), though there were also dissenters (Franz Boas etc). Rejected scientific theories are not necessarily the same as pseudo-science; our article on phlogiston theory calls it a "superseded scientific theory"... AnonMoos (talk) 23:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]