# 4.1 Defining race as a position on a hierarchy

What sorts of features of society might race be based on? Some philosophers think that race is a matter of power: hierarchical power relationships that are the fundamental social relations that underlie race. If race is a matter of power, then what race an individual is will depend on facts about their position in a social hierarchy.

Below is a definition of race as a matter of power, adapted from the definition provided by the American philosopher Sally Haslanger (2019).

> Within a particular social context, races are groups whose members are:

> 1. observed or perceived to have physical features that are taken to be evidence of ancestry from a particular geographical region
> 2. marked as occupying either a subordinate (inferior) or privileged (superior) position on a social hierarchy based on these physical features

(Haslanger, 2019)

Condition (a) says that members of races are assumed to have ancestry from a particular geographical region (for example, Africa, Asia or Europe) on the basis of their physical features. Someone’s actual ancestry does not matter according to this definition. What matters is what other people judge an individual’s ancestry to be. What physical features are used to make these judgements can vary depending on the society in question.

Condition (b) says that having these physical features is what marks someone out for differential treatment. They are placed in either a subordinate or privileged position on a social hierarchy. Social hierarchies are systems in which some individuals enjoy a higher social status than others. Those who are privileged in a social hierarchy may have (for example) more access to wealth, more access to resources such as housing, employment, healthcare, and education, more opportunities, and be treated with more respect by others than those who are subordinated in a social hierarchy. Also, those who are subordinated in a social hierarchy may be at greater risk of harassment or assault, be discriminated against by others, or face harsher treatment within the criminal justice system. Societies with social hierarchies often have ideologies that justify this differential treatment.

Here’s an example of how this process might play out:

> Akash and Ben live in the UK. They go to the airport to catch a flight to their holiday destination. Airport security spot the two: based on their skin colour, facial features, and hair texture, they make the assumption that Akash has ancestry from South Asia and Ben has ancestry from Europe. The security officers believe that South Asians are more likely to be involved in terroristic or trafficking activities than Europeans. Based on this assumption, they subject Akash to an extensive search and an unpleasant interrogation, while they let Ben sail through security.

In this example, the ancestry of both men is inferred based on features of their physical appearance. Within a particular society, certain physical markers will be used to infer ancestry and others will not. For example, skin colour and facial features may be commonly used to infer ancestry, while height or foot size may not be. The judgement of where Akash and Ben’s ancestors were from is the basis for their differential treatment. Akash is disadvantaged compared to Ben when he receives worse treatment than Ben by airport security. If this is not a peculiar quirk of these particular airport security officers, but instead a general pattern by which South Asians are disadvantaged, then Akash’s poorer treatment relative to Ben is part of systematic subordination and privilege within a social hierarchy.

If race is a matter of power, this does not mean that every member of a subordinated race is disadvantaged relative to every member of a privileged race. One reason for this is because societies often have multiple social hierarchies: for example, on the basis of gender, class, sexual orientation, disability, migration status or physical attractiveness. Someone may be privileged in some of these dimensions and subordinated in others. Another reason is incidental or non-systematic variations in individuals’ circumstances or personalities that affect their access to resources or opportunities. However, if race really is a matter of power, a general hierarchy must exist within a society, and people must be placed at a position in that hierarchy based on their perceived ancestry.

Philosophers who think that race is fundamentally about power don’t deny biological dimensions of human diversity. They accept that there are differences in physical appearance between humans that are correlated with geographical ancestry – people with ancestors from certain regions are more likely on average to have certain skin colours, hair textures, or facial features. However, these philosophers deny that those differences constitute or determine race. Rather, they are characteristics that, in certain social contexts, trigger the positioning of an individual within a hierarchy. What makes someone the race that they are is where they are in a racial hierarchy.

OpenLearn - What can philosophy tell us about race?
Except for third party materials and otherwise, this content is made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 Licence, full copyright detail can be found in the acknowledgements section. Please see full copyright statement for details.