[Taxacom] Cladifications are NOT classifications (MonaLisafrowning)
deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
Tue Aug 1 12:38:39 CDT 2006
I think it's partly semantics, and partly philosophical differences.
Most of us probably have a mutual understanding of what a "phylogeny" is,
and what "nomenclature" is.
The semantic problem revolves around the mapping of the word
"classification" to either/both of these two things.
The philosophical differences revolve more around the direct relationships
between "phylogeny" and "nomenclature" (irrespective of how one defines the
P.S. I'm definitely on board with your proposed solution to the quagmire!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Edwards, G.B.
> Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2006 6:50 AM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Cladifications are NOT classifications
> I agree. In fact, after reading the exchanges on this
> subject, it seems that 'classification' will be a never
> ending source of controversy. So why don't we just forget
> it, and let the 'phylogeny' fall where it may with the
> available data. Then we can continue to use without angst
> the commonly accepted names for groups regardless of what
> paraphyletic subgroups have arisen from them. Gosh, I bet
> someone else already thought of that...
> Semi-facetiously yours,
> G. B. Edwards, Ph.D. [Your Friendly Neighborhood Spiderman]
> Curator: Arachnida (except Acari), Myriapoda, Terrestrial
> Crustacea, Thysanoptera Florida State Collection of
> Arthropods, FDACS, Division of Plant Industry P.O.Box 147100,
> 1911 SW 34th St., Gainesville, FL 32614-7100 USA
> (352) 372-3505 x194; fax (352) 334-0737; edwardg at doacs.state.fl.us
> Seems that we are getting bogged down again in another
> semantic quagmire... Ken
> Taxacom mailing list
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Taxacom mailing list
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
More information about the Taxacom