The debate on the concept of race has been ongoing for years among scientists, historians and anthropologists. One side of the debate, historically supported by scientists and biologists, holds that race is biological and developed as a result of evolution. The other side of the debate, usually supported by historians, social scientists and anthropologists, holds that race is not genetic but is a social and cultural construct. This historiography will discuss how topics and concepts of race have developed over time in the fields of history and science. Berlin, Wade, Lenkeit, Rosenberg, and Gravlee all examine the question of race and how to define this concept, however each approaches this in different ways using different methods. First, this essay will compare the arguments of Rosenberg and Wade, who both argue that race is a biological topic. Second, this essay will discuss the similarities and differences between Berlin and Lenkeit's arguments. Third, this essay will compare Gravlee's arguments to those of other authors, discussing how his piece is both similar and different from others. Finally, this historiography will discuss how the context of the time period in which each writer was discussing their pieces influenced how they perceived race as a concept. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay First, Rosenberg and Wade make similar points, however, they use different methods to argue their opinions. Both Rosenberg and Wade overall argue that race is the result of the evolutionary process and exists and is a biological construct. Rosenberg argues that human races exist in a biological sense, not as a cultural construct, but as a result of evolution and natural selection. Wade also argues that human races exist as a result of evolution and natural selection, however the way he argues this point differs from Rosenberg. The difference between Rosenberg and Wade's methods in making their case is the position they both take. Rosenberg, while maintaining that race is biological and is the result of natural selection, states that these differences in genetic composition between races do not have much significance. However, Wade criticizes anthropologists for making the topic of race taboo, stating that race has great importance socially, culturally, and scientifically, and also stating in his article "some biologists have begun to agree that human races exist, but they hasten to add that the fact means very little." This is where the two authors differ in their methods of arguing about race as biological; Rosenberg argues that racial variation does not matter much, while Wade argues that race has a significant impact on society and culture. Wade wrote his article to raise awareness and discuss the topic of race as he claims it is considered a taboo topic, which has social and cultural implications, while Rosenberg is writing his piece as part of human genetic research. Another way in which Rosenberg and Wade's arguments are similar but the methods differ is through the argument that race is due to natural selection and is defined as distinct populations living geographically apart. Rosenberg argues that there are human races living in different areas, however this is blurring due to increased migration. However, Wade argues that human races are defined as people living in separate places. He argues that evolution has not stopped, but race as biology adaptsand is continually formed. Ultimately, Wade and Rosenberg hold similar concepts, that race is biological, not a social construct, and that races are the result of the evolutionary process, however their methods differ in their writing. Second, unlike Rosenberg and Wade, Berlin and Both Lenkeit argue that race is not biological but is a social and cultural construct, emphasizing that races do not exist biologically. Lenkeit thinks from an anthropological perspective, focusing on race as a construct through the lens of human development and how society functions. Lenkeit is writing this book chapter to establish race as a social construct and distance the concept from its biological understanding and ties. However, Berlin goes a step further by using a different method in arguing that race is a social construct, stating that not only is race culturally constructed but it is a historical construct. Berlin argues that by simply labeling race as a social construct, he has won few practical battles and changed social behavior little. She argues that this is because race must be understood as a product of history and changing relationships over time, while focusing on the changing nature of the concept of race during slavery in North America. Lenkeit makes his case for race as a social construction through the lens of anthropology and humans, while Berlin uses the method of looking at race through historical events as a whole and how societies and institutions have influenced race as a concept throughout history. Furthermore, both Berlin and Lenkeit argue that race has been shaped by people's experiences and narrow perceptions. For example, Lenkeit points out that in North America, white Americans often associated blacks with Africans since black slaves were the only Africans they had experience with. Both authors argue that race as a concept is the result of perceived differences reinforced by social groups, differing from both Rosenberg's and Wade's claims that race is biological and not constructed by people's experiences. Furthermore, Berlin does not directly reject geneticists or scientists who argue that race is biological, but aims to build on the idea that race is a social construct in supporting the historical understanding of race as a concept. In contrast, Lenkeit takes a more defensive approach, stating that race is not biological but that variations among humans are the result of clinal variations and geographic location. Ultimately, Berlin and Lenkeit make similar points, that race is a social construct, however they differ in how they argue their points in the context of their social science research. Third, unlike all four other authors, Gravlee argues somewhere in the middle of the race debate. While Wade and Rosenberg argue that race is biological and is the result of evolution and natural selection, Gravlee argues that race is biological but is not the result of evolution. Furthermore, in contrast to the arguments made by Berlin and Lenkeit that race was a cultural and historical construct, Gravlee argues that race is rooted in society and transmitted through biological pathways. Gravlee ultimately argues that race as perceived is a culturally constructed concept, however, because systematic racism is embodied in the biology of racialized groups, inequalities and consequences are transmitted across generations. Gravlee rejects Rosenberg's claims that genetic variation shows that individuals.