This paper examines how sociologists understand race and racism in American society. It begins by critiquing biological determinist approaches — notably Herrnstein's Bell Curve — and argues that socioeconomic factors better explain racial disparities in IQ scores. The paper then distinguishes between individual and institutional racism, showing that both levels must be considered for a complete sociological analysis. Three major theoretical frameworks are applied: the functionalist perspective, which views racism as contributing to social differentiation and scapegoating; the conflict perspective, which links racism to capitalism and economic exploitation; and the interactionist perspective, which situates racism in socialization, symbols, and communication patterns. Each framework's strengths and limitations are assessed.
This study guide is drawn from PaperDue's library of 130,000+ paper examples across 47 subjects.
Sociologists recognize that social stratification is a cultural universal — an aspect present in every society. In many societies, these social hierarchies are based on factors like class, gender, or kinship. In the United States and most advanced industrialized capitalist countries, for example, being wealthy can significantly improve a person's life chances.
In a society as diverse as the United States, racial and ethnic categories are another key factor in determining social hierarchy and one's life chances. In the 2000 Census, respondents were given a choice of 15 racial groups to choose from; additionally, they were given the option of choosing two or more races when appropriate.
For many people, these racial categories are a crucial determinant of identity. In addition to how people are grouped by race, sociologists are also interested in the social meanings and significances that people attach to race. For sociologists, race should be studied beyond physical characteristics like skin and hair color. Because of the social definitions and significances that people attach to skin color in the United States, race has become a determinant of social status.
This paper examines how sociologists have approached race as a social construct. It begins by discussing the different associations people have made regarding race, then examines how racism functions on both an individual and an institutional level in American society, and finally analyzes racism through the structural functionalist, conflict, and interactionist perspectives.
Sociologists have documented how race has often been used as an indicator of a person's intelligence, morality, personality, criminal tendencies, and other characteristics. Among the most contentious recent studies is The Bell Curve, in which sociologist Richard Herrnstein discusses the development of a "cognitive elite" — an upper class based on intelligence. Herrnstein further argues that racial groups differ in intelligence (Herrnstein 589–591). The Bell Curve presents statistical evidence in the form of graphs showing a correlation between race and IQ. In Herrnstein's analysis, African Americans and Latinos scored consistently lower on IQ tests compared to their Caucasian and Asian counterparts.
This approach, however, has important flaws. By ascribing a correlation based solely on race and IQ, Herrnstein's study is largely unsociological and comes close to biological determinism.
Since IQ and educational attainment could be tied to socioeconomic status, one could argue that the lower IQ scores among African American groups are linked to poverty. People from lower socioeconomic or lower-income families generally receive their education from overcrowded and underfunded schools. Children from lower-income families are further constrained by a lack of resources, such as access to computers at home. Many poorer children who must work after school to help support their families cannot devote as much time to studying as their more affluent peers.
These socioeconomic factors provide alternative explanations for Herrnstein's correlation — factors that account for the seemingly causal relationship between IQ and race. Herrnstein's failure to consider these factors therefore severely weakens his conclusions.
Related to the social construction of racism, sociologists have also been interested in how racism appears to operate on two distinct social levels. On the individual level, many people come to believe that some ethnic or racial categories are "superior" while others are "inferior." Richard Nisbett, for example, studied the relationship between race, genetics, and IQ (Nisbett 86–101).
Such studies highlight the human tendency to classify people into racial groups based on biological traits. This tendency gives rise to racism by paving the way for an in-group versus out-group mentality, in which people develop an aversion to members of different racial groups. For proponents of individual-level analysis, this in-group mentality provides the foundation for the development of prejudice and discrimination.
This level of analysis, however, focuses mainly on the individual and overlooks the role of social institutions. There is a danger of equating "human tendencies" with what is "natural," without taking into consideration the social institutions that spawn racism. Racism is also practiced and perpetuated on an institutional level, embedded in social structures. The ongoing debates regarding affirmative action, for example, are aimed at reversing the institutional racism in many colleges that has kept racial minorities from accessing higher education.
In summary, analyzing racism solely at the individual level neglects the role that social institutions — such as religion, media, and education — play in reinforcing ideas about race. A complete sociological analysis must also examine the role played by these relevant social institutions.
"Racism as social differentiation and scapegoating"
"Racism linked to capitalism and labor exploitation"
"Racism rooted in socialization and communication"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.