Human classification is the grouping of individuals into groups based on biological and cultural /anthropological characteristics. Individual classifications signify different behavioral characteristics which is accompanied by different psychological characteristics. Relatively, grouping of human on the basis of such characteristics is ideally important in understanding various psychological characteristics. However, this has been a basic foundation of destroying the level of relationship between different group classifications.
This is in the view that different classes of people have been limited towards specific characteristics parameters which has even led to the revolution of the societal cohesion and stability promulgated to the contemporary society. Generally, human grouping has fallen into three fundamental groups/models. The typological model seeks to divide people into various geographical groups basing them on specific characteristics that occur regularly within such groups. This is synonymous to racial subdivision in the modern contemporary context.
The model has focus on small characteristics traits that are observed about the groups, which include stature, skin color and hair form above others. Accordingly, the past generation has depicted purely unmixed human races. According to Carolus Linnaueus, the human population can be classified into four groups. (http://anthro. palomar. edu/vary/vary_2. htm) However typologically system has been echoed as basically a false assumption in explaining the variation in human race.
Consequently, the human race has unambiguously been assigned to different races in response to their traits. This has led to difficulties in human race categorization. Elsewhere, the model has given rise to a broad autonomy of human races, which only arise from the varied number of traits. The population model seeks to classify human depending on evolutionary terms that response to specific ancestral periods. According to the model, different parental ancestors mated at different periods to give out different human physiological outcomes.
Consequently, individuals arising from various ancestral characteristics depict different genetic autonomies. Elsewhere, closely related individuals share common ideals in their genetic dispensation. It seeks to look human in respect to breeding biographies that have given out various physiological and anatomical characteristics. It refutes the typological model by arguing that geographic and cultural barriers that could have existed in group mating were long broken and provided freedom of mating between different genetic humans.
This has perhaps been evident via cultural intermarriages that have been evident in more than 500 years ago. (http://anthro. palomar. edu/vary/vary_2. htm) The clinical model seeks to understand and classify humans into different genetic groups based on the argument that there is a gradual change in the genetic make up of humans which consequently yield different human biological understandings.
However, unlike population and the typological models, this model does not yield distinction racial groups of people. Since human have had the freedom of interaction, mating has frequently occurred to yield various genetic foundations. However, these characteristics have gone through evolution yielding a different human domain. Human classification is ideally, important in grouping of human according to specific characteristics that help understand different human regimes along the evolutionally era.
However, disparities held by these classification has led to social disintegrations and breaking of social cohesion of the society when people differ in terms of different group classifications. This has consequently led to decay of the fundamental harmony that implies human coexistence within their societies. (Sherwood, 1963, p. 41)
Modern Human Variations. Models of Classifications. Retrieved on 2nd May 2008 from http://anthro. palomar. edu/vary/vary_2. htm Sherwood Washburn (1963) Classification and Human Evolution. Aldine Publishing Company, pp. 41Sample Essay of PaperDon.com