[A.J.Armitage]

Given that circles and squares exist, we can take square-ish ovals and place them in the category of square-like objects and we can take round-ish ovals and place them in the category of circle-like objects.

If you want to. But circle-like and circle aren't the same thing. Circle-like is a mental category to make things easier, which is say a construct. That it's based on an underlying reality doesn't make it less of a construct.

Questions of race can be handled similarly.

What questions of race do you have in mind?

[A.J.Armitage]

which is say

Which is to say.

[FreedomCalls]

What questions of race do you have in mind?

The scientific field is called "Taxonomy." There are people who devote their lives to placing things into categories. The oft-raised question is: can humans be categorized by what are commonly called "racial characteristics"? I'm not a taxonomist, it doesn't really matter to me. It apparently does matter to a lot of people. The government is constantly asking me "which race" I belong to. I on the other hand, do care when people want to deny that there are differences between things such as circles and squares. That kind of ignoring the obvious can lead to pseudoscience.