follow up on paraphyly / polyphyly

Michael Schmitt m.schmitt at UNI-BONN.DE
Thu Nov 11 13:38:07 CST 2004

Dear colleagues,

At 10:56 11.11.2004, Zdenek Skala wrote:
>Michael Schmitt wrote:
> > Thus, the primary question is, in my view, whether or not we aim at a
> > strictly phylogenetic (Hennigian) system. In case of yes, things are clear,
> > in case of no, the "problems" are irrelevant.
>In my view, this is a pretty ideological posting. The discussion and
>solving of "problems" should come first and THEN we can decide about our
>adherence to Hennigian (or any other) system.

Of course, everybody is free to deem my posting as ideological.
Nevertheless, I uphold a view (obviously) opposite to that of Zdenek Skala:
I think, first we have to choose a theoretical background or frame, and
then we (can) decide on possible solutions to problems. In my opinion, it
makes sense only against a certain theoretical background or within a
certain methodological frame to discuss on "problems", since only after
having chosen a certain background we can recognise problems at all.

                                  Best regards
                                 Michael Schmitt

* Prof.Dr. Michael Schmitt (Zoologischer Anzeiger, Editor-in-   *
* Chief; Bonner zoologische Beitraege, Editor-in-Chief)         *
* Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig   *
* Adenauerallee 160, D-53113 Bonn, Germany                      *
* Phone/Fax: +49 228-9122 286, e-mail: m.schmitt at    *
*           *

More information about the Taxacom mailing list