Groups are real for social science and anti-racist politics despite lacking shared essences.

Evidence

Some sociologists interpret the ‘anti’ to mean that all groups are fictitious constructions and that the task of sociology is to ‘deconstruct’ them. If we take this approach there is no space left for genuine group identities, and so none for recognition or group accommodation. I think groups are necessary both to social science and to anti-racism or egalitarian politics, and so I work with an alternative interpretation of anti-essentialism derived from the philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein (1968). His concept of family resemblance offers a way of recognizing that just as it does not make sense to say that games or languages do not exist because they do not share a common, definitional essence, so the lack of group essences and discrete, bounded populations with unchanging characteristics is not a good reason to assert in an a priori way that groups do not exist. — A. Hussain, N. Meer, Framing Muslim Integration, 593

Categorization

• DEFINE: Distinguishes two rival versions of anti-essentialism: the deconstructionist one that dissolves groups entirely, and the Wittgensteinian family-resemblance version that keeps groups real without essences.
• XREF: Connects to the definitional debates in the Islamophobia literature — Runnymede’s ‘open vs closed views’ framework and Bleich’s concept-formation both implicitly take positions on whether ‘Muslims’ is a legitimate group category; Modood’s move parallels Bleich’s neutral concept construction while diverging politically. — connects to: Socially constructed race still drives real-world outcomes for groups — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia: Still a Challenge for Us…, 105; Race has no biological reality but is a potent social force; Socially constructed religions can still be real — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 808
• SEED: The ‘groups exist without essences’ position is the methodological keystone for classifying the whole Islamophobia definitional dispute — an essay comparing rival definitions by which anti-essentialism stance each presupposes would clarify the stakes.

Related

• Wittgenstein’s family resemblance justifies Muslims as a real, non-essential group. (similarity 0.90)
• Socially constructed race still drives real-world outcomes for groups (similarity 0.85)
• Muslim group identity is socially constructed, not defined by any shared essence. (similarity 0.84)
• Muslims were told anti-Muslim racism cannot exist because Muslims are not a race (similarity 0.79)
• Race’s specificity is positional rather than essential yet remains real (similarity 0.79)
• Mainstream race-equality groups narrowed Islamophobia to mere religious discrimination (similarity 0.79)

Broader Connections

• Socially constructed race still drives real-world outcomes for groups #corroborates (0.95) — Runnymede Trust (ed. Farah Elahi & Omar Khan), Islamophobia, 105
• Race has no biological reality but is a potent social force #corroborates (0.90)
• Socially constructed religions can still be real #corroborates (0.80) — Frans Dokman, Beyond Bantu Philosophy_…, 808