cladisto-eclecticism -Reply

Alessandra Baptista Baptista.Alessandra at NMNH.SI.EDU
Sat Sep 18 10:49:54 CDT 1999

Thanks, Kinman,

I have a general question to everybody: I frequently receive two copies of
the same message. I received my own message twice, and kinman's message also
twice. Is this a problem with the system, or are we doing something wrong
when we send the msgs ?

>>> Ken Kinman <kinman at HOTMAIL.COM> 09/17/99 05:01pm >>>
Alessandra and others,
     Cladisto-eclecticism was introduced in my 1994 book, "The Kinman
System: Toward A Stable Cladisto-Eclectic Classification of Organisms
(Living and Extinct; 48 Phyla, 269 Classes, 1,719 Orders)".  The only public
copies in your immediate area, Alessandra, are at the Library of Congress.
     Cladisto-eclecticism (which is just one aspect of the Kinman System,
but the most important one) is my attempt to "fuse" together what I
perceived to be the best aspects of both cladistic and traditional eclectic
methodologies (sometimes called by nebulous terms, phylogenetic and
evolutionary systematics), and eliminate what seemed to be the main
disadvantages of each of these two competing methodologies.
      The resulting single methodology was introduced in the 1994 book,
using my updated classification of life as one enormous example of how it
would work and demonstrating its advantages.  My biggest challenge was (and
still is) to convince strict cladists that the limited use of my
"semi-parphyletic" groups could store and convey sister group information,
and therefore make possible classifications that were acceptable and useful
to all biologists (and a side benefit is that it's also more comprehensible
and useful to non-biologists than strictly cladistic ones).  This is that
"fertile middle-ground" I was referring to, and I still hope it can bring
cladists and eclecticists together in a way that neither side probably ever
thought possible.  Time will tell.
                         -----Ken Kinman
>From: Alessandra Baptista <Baptista.Alessandra at NMNH.SI.EDU>

>What is "cladisto-eclecticism" ?
>At least eclecticists will admit to such arbitrariness, and I wish strict
>cladists would eventually do the same, so we could start exploring this
>fertile "middle ground" I have termed cladisto-eclecticism. For now I've
>got to run (some of that "real" evolutionary work awaits my attention).

Get Your Private, Free Email at

More information about the Taxacom mailing list