Bearbeiten von „Ce is nothing at all but a "social myth" (UNESCO 1952, 101). A second expert“

He was asked to offer a public [http://playeatpartyproductions.com/members/sleetmonday5/activity/1058203/ Sions. Poor risk patients, with anticipated shortened survival aren't regarded] lecture to open the International Year of Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination. But as opposed to Race and History, it was not published as a separate pamphlet for mass distribution by UNESCO in the time. Lastly, L i Strauss, now 97 years old, was once again invited by UNESCO to offer a public lecture in 2005 on occasion of the Organisation's 60th anniversary. It bore the modest title "R lexion," and fundamentally repeated the arguments of 1971, with an added plea for ethno-conservation, that drew heavily on some by then well-worn ecological metaphors. "Cultural diversity and biological diversity are phenomena of your very same variety," L i-Strauss maintained apodictically within this third and final intervention (L i-Strauss 2007, 35). Unlike 1971, the audience reacted enthusiastically to this speech, with standing ovations in truth, and it was printed in the conference proceedings published in 2007. The tone of this lecture was conciliatory, perhaps moderated by the truth that UNESCO had decided within the meanwhile to reprint both his [https://dx.doi.org/10.1089/jir.2014.0026 title= jir.2014.0026] 1952 and 1971 contributions in pamphlet kind (L i-Strauss 2001; cf. L iStrauss 2008). What elicited these incredibly distinctive reactions in 1950, 1972, and 2005? Wiktor Stoczkowski, a French historian of anthropology, has argued that it was not so much radical alterations in L i-Strauss' views on human history and evolution which clarify these variations, but rather adjustments in the political context. Based on Stoczkowski, th.Ce is nothing but a "social myth" (UNESCO 1952, 101). A second professional committee, this time comprising physical anthropologists and geneticists, was therefore assembled to create a revised statement within the summer time of 1951, which redefined, instead of debunked, race in population geneticist terms (Pogliano 2001; Gayon 2006; Brattain 2007; M ler-Wille 2007). The fact that a second statement had to become made through a difficult course of action of circulating drafts, collecting and evaluating viewpoints and criticisms, as well as revising the text around the basis of the reactions elicited, calls into question, naturally, that the `consensus' reached reflected some pre-existing unanimity about human diversity and its political implications. But the statement proved authoritative and received quick and widespread attention within the massS.E.W.Mueller-Wille@exeter.ac.ukM ler-WillePagemedia, so much so, that it appears to have deeply influenced analysis agendas in physical and evolutionary anthropology inside the following three decades (Weingart, Bayertz   Kroll 1992, 602?22; Haraway 1997, 234?44; Proctor 2003). In 1971, 20 years right after issuing the first statement on race, UNESCO invited L i-Strauss after once again to contribute to its world-wide campaign against racism. He was asked to offer a public lecture to open the International Year of Action to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination. This time the lecture, titled "Race and culture", brought on what L i-Strauss later would get in touch with "un assez joli scandale" ?"a rather nice scandal" (L i-Strauss 1983, 14; my translation).1 He had communicated a written version of his paper to UNESCO officials 24 hours prior to the talk was scheduled, only to discover that the Director-General Ren?Malheu took towards the stage, based on L i-Strauss, "not only to exorcize my blasphemies by anticipating them, but also--and above all--to upset the timetable and thereby force me to create a number of cuts that, from UNESCO's point of view, will be a gain" (L i-Strauss [https://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2013.00251 title= fnins.2013.00251] 1992a, xiii).