It's ok, spoken to Babar in PM. Just took objection to the fact that I used the term SJW multiple pages ago and it keeps cropping up as insinuating I have some kind of anti-liberal worldview.
The problem with race is that there are methodological problems in defining it. As I said in my earlier post it depends which characteristics we use to define it. From what I understand there is no biological definition of race because as we are one species, the parameters for categorisation are necessarily arbitrary. If one defined race by frequency of a certain allele for example, you make an arbitrary quantification of the frequency needed (as W Boyd says). And this leads to the logical conclusion that theoretically there can be equal races to people, if you set the parameters so.
Edit: I think the observation "that there is greater variation within 'racial' groups than between them" is somewhat pithy, considering we share 98% of our genes with chimpanzees.
I actually think the issues with defining race is parallel to that of cultures that we spoke of earlier. Again it tends to the problem of reductionism, because you will inevitably make wrong assumptions about some of the individuals you classify in order to reach a coherent treatment of the whole. Now in theory you couldn't make wrong assumptions using a genetic yardstick, allele frequency, because that is observable biologically. But then it brings us back to the problem of mathematical arbitrariness…
What I'm trying to get at is that although it may be impossible to define race biologically, you are still able to observe clear differences in human populations, differences which are genetic. One can sort white men from black men by looking at them, as you can sort red apples from green apples.