“In Ways Unacademical”: The Reception of Carleton S. Coon's The Origin of Races [Book Review]

Journal of the History of Biology 34 (2):247 - 285 (2001)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This paper examines the controversy surrounding anthropologist Carleton S. Coon's 1962 book, "The Origin of Races." Coon maintained that the human sspecies was divided into five races before it had evolved into Homo sapiens and that the races evolved into sapiens at different times. Coon's thesis was used by segregationists in the United States as proof that African Americans were "junior" to white Americans and hence unfit for full participation in American society. The paper examines the interactions among Coon, segregationist Carleton Putnam, geneticist Theodosius Dobzhansky, and anthropologist Sherwood Washburn. The paper concludes that Coon actively aided the segregationist cause in violation of his own standards for scientific objectivity.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 100,865

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2011-05-29

Downloads
50 (#436,124)

6 months
12 (#290,681)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

“A temporary oversimplification”: Mayr, Simpson, Dobzhansky, and the origins of the typology/population dichotomy. [REVIEW]Joeri Witteveen - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 55 (C):20-33.
“A temporary oversimplification”: Mayr, Simpson, Dobzhansky, and the origins of the typology/population dichotomy (part 1 of 2). [REVIEW]Joeri Witteveen - 2015 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 54 (C):96-105.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Weighing the risks: Stalemate in the classical/balance controversy.John Beatty - 1987 - Journal of the History of Biology 20 (3):289-319.

Add more references