Your complimentary articles

You’ve read one of your four complimentary articles for this month.

You can read four articles free per month. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please

SUBSCRIBE NOW

Articles

The Philosophy of Race

Sailee Khurjekar argues that race is culturally constructed.

We know what the human race is, but what about the different ‘races’ that comprise it? There are competing theories about the definition and role of human races, alongside debates surrounding the existence of races at all. Social constructionism is the idea that beliefs are formed by the habits and traditions of a society. Social constructionists on race are concerned with the relationship of race to social reality. This is also what I want us to be concerned with briefly here.

There are two major strands of social constructionism on race: political constructionism and cultural constructionism. Sally Haslanger is a proponent of the former, and believes that race is constituted by power relations. She raises awareness of the power relations between different groups, especially in the incitement of violence and oppression, and addresses the unequal treatment of groups of people by other groups. Chike Jeffers, meanwhile, is a proponent of cultural constructionism. He adopts a hybrid approach: the origins of race are political, but the persistence of the idea of race in the future is tied to its cultural power. I will try to show that the social constructionist position on race provides the most convincing definition of what race is, specifically proposing why we should be cultural constructionists on race.

Social Constructionism on Race

Clearly one can be a social constructionist about categories that are seen as evidently social: for example, money, which only exists because certain tokens have been assigned value and importance by people in society. This constructionist view can be contrasted with a realist position on money, which maintains that money is an objective entity whose value is independent of social and political relations. According to philosopher Ásta Kristjana Sveinsdóttir, social constructionists also aim to reveal a category as being a social category even when it’s widely held to be a natural one.

Many philosophers, historians, sociologists, and anthropologists have been interested in human races as social constructs. If one believes that racial difference is not based on any evident biological reality, then what remains is the idea of race as constructed within social relations.

Social constructionism on race is worth investigating for a couple of reasons. First, it adds value to discussions about race that arise around social situations. Second, it provides insight into humans as social beings by documenting customs and traditions carried out by a given race: for example, how Native Americans paint their faces and bodies for dances, prayers, and battles.

Social constructionism is better placed to accommodate positions on race in a way that realism or eliminativism cannot. For instance, if we eliminate the idea of races altogether, we run into problems of erasure. Without racial categories, we fail to seriously consider those who were oppressed in history. Perhaps we have a responsibility to remember those who have faced the tyranny of racial injustice, and the preservation of racial categories allows us to do that.

Political Constructionism on Race

For political constructionists, a group is racialised relative to a context if and only if members of that group are observed or imagined to possess certain bodily features presumed to be evidence of ancestry in relation to a specific region or regions, and having or being imagined to possess these bodily features marks them as occupying either subordinated or privileged positions in society, where the presumed identity would play a role in the privilege or subordination.

Haslanger focuses on the global sociopolitical landscape of white supremacy and its impact on power relations, and she takes imagined features and presumed ancestry as markers of racial subordination or privilege. For instance, if a man is observed or imagined to possess facial characteristics that indicate he’s of South Indian descent. And, based on that, he is treated in a subordinating way, then we can say that he is racialised under this framework. Simply put, if the man looks South Indian and everyone treats him as if he is South Indian – for instance, by subordinating him based on his appearance – then he is South Indian.

There are two strengths of political constructionism worth mentioning. The first is the idea that races as we know them have been established in the modern era largely through the lens of European imperialism. A political constructionist might describe the social significance of white distinctness as having been born out of Western imperialist ideology. The second is that it persuasively conveys the role of race in personal experience. For example, a black child adopted by wealthy white parents will be stopped by the police more times than his white friends as he grows up. The boy will never experience the same social responses as his parents.

Image © Cecilia Mou 2025 Instagram @moucecilia

Cultural Constructionism on Race

Chike Jeffers, by contrast, sees race as both politically and culturally constructed. He presents what I would call a moderate cultural constructionism. Jeffers argues that the conditions for the origin of races and the conditions for the continuation of races are different. He agrees with Haslanger that the idea of race has a political origin, born out of European imperialism and colonialism. For political constructionists like Haslanger, the end of racism would bring about the end of races, as she considers races to reflect hierarchies of power. But Jeffers appeals to culture to preserve race in a post-racially-divided world, so that even if hierarchical power relations cease to exist, racial groups can continue to exist as cultural groups.

The political account of race illuminates various problems in education, such as inequality in basic access, inequality in funding, and unequal treatment of students by teachers and other staff with regard to discipline and provision of opportunities. It addresses the discrimination that non-white minorities face in schools dominated by white students. I think there are those who agree with the need for some change in policies, but not on grounds of race. For example, a politician might promote educational policies to encourage children to partake in the workforce regardless of their sex, race, religion, and so on. The aim would be an economic one: it does not matter who makes up the workforce, so long as money is constantly generated. We need to show, then, where culture fits in to this picture. To look solely at political or economic motivations for educational policies is to ignore the problems ensuing from the lack of black cultural representation – such as that black students are dropping out of school at higher rates than their fellow students.

One solution to address the drop-out rates might be to provide black-specific schools, where teachers would take a mainly black-centred approach, for example, by focusing on black history. I would reject this option. I do not think that segregation is the solution. Instead, a more cultural approach would encourage black students in mixed classes. For instance, art teachers could spend a significant part of the year focusing on black artists, such as Basquiat and Kara Walker. The positive value of celebrating black culture will also improve white students’ awareness of black artists, in turn engendering a greater respect for other cultures.

Stereotyping is often harmful and upsetting to the people being stereotyped. The political constructionist would argue that stereotypes strip us of our individuality through group generalisations. The solution is perhaps to affirm one’s own individuality. Jeffers notes that indigenous groups in North America focus on debates about land ownership, hunting, and fishing. Instead of considering this as encouraging harmful stereotypes about indigenous groups, we can instead appreciate and learn from the cultural differences between their way of life and ours. This involves a celebration of different customs and traditions, even those that appear foreign and distant to our own.

Jeffers thinks that a cultural construction of race generally precludes harmful stereotypes. However, we should be wary of this claim. For instance, it’s a stereotype to say that ‘black men are often criminals’, even if a large portion of the prison population are black, because we run into the danger of making essentialist claims based on numbers, which is misleading when the cause for the imbalance is something other than race, such as poverty.

A Defence of Cultural Constructionism on Race

Cultural constructionism argues that race is created and sustained by the cultural narratives, symbols, and institutional practices of a society. For instance, in the United States the concept of race was shaped by historical processes such as slavery, colonialism, and segregation. These cultures assigned racial categories to justify exploitation. Over time, these categories became embedded in the legal system, education, media, and language, giving them an appearance of permanence and objectivity. But the meanings of racial categories are not universal or fixed – they change over time, and vary from society to society. What it means to be ‘black’, ‘white’, or ‘Asian’ in one country can be quite different in another. Even within a single society, racial identities are fluid and often contested. This variability well illustrates that race is not an inherent attribute but a cultural interpretation of difference. Being a cultural constructionist about race allows us to see these shifts not as anomalies, but as evidence of race’s socially constructed nature.

Adopting a cultural constructionist view does not minimise the reality of racism. On the contrary, it helps us understand how racism operates. By revealing race as a product of cultural meaning-making, we can see how stereotypes, institutional policies, and unequal power dynamics perpetuate inequalities. Cultural constructionism also offers hope for change. If race is a cultural invention, it can also be reimagined. Recognising that race is socially constructed allows us to expose the concept’s foundations, critique its consequences, and work toward more inclusive and equitable ways of relating to one another. It gives us the tools to deconstruct harmful narratives and to promote solidarity across perceived racial boundaries.

Finally, we should be cultural constructionists on race because such a position provides a more accurate, historically grounded, and socially responsible way of understanding human difference. It reveals race not as a biological destiny but as a cultural story – one that we have the power to rewrite.

Sailee Khurjekar is a PhD student in Philosophy at Birkbeck, University of London, writing a thesis on obscenity and art censorship. She is also a Theology and Philosophy teacher and the Head of Debating at Haberdashers’ Boys’ School in Hertfordshire.