Understanding evolution problems
jgrehan at SCIENCEBUFF.ORG
Thu Mar 4 13:41:36 CST 2004
At 12:30 PM 3/4/2004 -0600, Ken Kinman wrote:
> The incommensurability problem (never the twain shall meet) will
> eventually be solved by a "limited paraphyly" approach (with explicit
> place-markers), and strict cladism's intransigence is just delaying the
I'm ok with that as a point of view, but whether intransigence lies with
'strict cladists' or others is a matter of one' s position. Maybe I don't
find paraphyletic assemblages very informative for my purposes if I am
interested in lineage relationships. That's my choice, but its not
necessarily any more intransigent than any other choice.
> The longer it takes, the more unpleasant will be the transition to a new
> balanced paradigm (and lot of students will have to be deprogrammed and
> educated about what paraphyly really is).
'balanced paradigm' is a political concept. If politics is to rule science
then perhaps so. Otherwise, perhaps not.
> Eventually one of strict cladism's major blunders will become glaringly
> apparent and the tide will finally turn. The sooner the better.
Waiting in anticipation
>P.S. Of course, paraphyly is not the only methodology under attack. The
>Linnaean System is the other prime target.
I too would share concern over any such move.
Dr. John Grehan
Director of Science and Collections
Buffalo Museum of Science
1020 Humboldt Parkway
Buffalo, New York 14211-1293
Voice 716-896-5200 x372
jgrehan at sciencebuff.org
More information about the Taxacom