The article formalizes two competing worldviews: an 'orthodox' position that treats race as a social construct and disparities as products of racism, and a 'hereditarian' position that treats race as a biological phenomenon potentially linked to group differences in psychology. By laying out numbered propositions, it frames the dispute as testable claims rather than slogans.
— This clarifies the terms of a heated debate and invites evidence‑based adjudication rather than definitional or moral stand‑offs.
Arnold Kling
2026.01.12
55% relevant
Arnold Kling’s short review of Nicholas Wade’s book flags the political uses of evolutionary psychology; that ties to the documented entry of hereditarian/race‑realist claims into public debate (and the need to treat such claims with rigorous provenance and policy caution).
2026.01.05
92% relevant
Cofnas explicitly argues for ‘race realism’ as the scientifically correct position and as the linchpin for defeating wokism; that is a direct instantiation of the existing idea that frames race realism as a set of testable propositions that should be debated publicly.
2025.10.07
100% relevant
The author’s numbered lists contrasting the 'orthodox' view with 'race realism/hereditarianism' and their claims about genetic clustering and psychological variation.
2010.01.12
95% relevant
Sesardic’s paper is a direct philosophical and scientific challenge to eliminativist or social‑constructivist accounts of race; that maps onto the existing idea titled 'Race Realism’s Core Propositions' because both make explicit, contested claims that race can be a biologically meaningful construct and that elite narratives denying that are consequential. The article supplies the conceptual defense and literature engagement (Dobzhansky et al.) that underpins the listed idea’s project.