[Taxacom] More precise sound bite

John Grehan jgrehan at sciencebuff.org
Fri Mar 27 13:12:42 CDT 2009

As you say, not all 'strict cladists' (=cladists) are phylocodists. That's my point. But just because all phylocodists are cladists (assuming that is true) does not mean that cladistic necessitates the phylocode or that the phylocode is a manifestation of cladistics. 

John Grehan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-
> bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Kenneth Kinman
> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 1:35 PM
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: [Taxacom] More precise sound bite
> Hi John,
>        Frankly I think you are the one in denial.  PhyloCode is clearly
> an extreme manifestation of Hennigian cladifications.  Not all strict
> cladists are PhyloCodists, but all PhyloCodists ARE strict cladists (on
> steroids).  Anyway, I should have known better than bringing up
> PhyloCode, since so many strict cladists seem oblivious to how
> destabilizing it can become (in some ways it already is, even though it
> has not yet been officially implemented).  It's an insidious threat that
> should not be minimized.
>            --------Ken Kinman
> ----------------------------------------------
> Ken,
> I am very accommodating to our different perspectives, but when you
> persist in linking cladistics with the Phylocode you are taking too much
> liberty with reality. To make such claims is like claiming there was no
> holocaust.
> John Grehan
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kenneth Kinman [mailto:kennethkinman at webtv.net]
> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2009 12:51 PM
> To: John Grehan
> Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: RE: [Taxacom] More precise sound bite
> John and Ronaldo,
>               Yes, you could say that
> cladism is a method. As a method of analysis (phylogenetic analysis), I
> have no huge problems with it. As a method of classification
> (cladification), it does cause problems when it is carried to excess (no
> paraphyletic taxa allowed). I sometimes prefer to call myself a
> cladisto-eclecticist, since many eclecticists think of "cladist" as a
> pejorative term (those guys that simplistically convert their
> phylogenetic analyses into cladifications).
>               As for being rather obsessed
> with this problem, I guess I'm guilty as charged. Obsessed with a return
> to more common sense and balance in classifications. I just wish more
> people had been obsessed with blowing the whistle on financial
> derivatives which undermined the stability of our financial system.
> Unfortunately, I don't think strict cladists really realize how they are
> slowly undermining our classification system (although the adoption of
> PhyloCode will no doubt then make it glaringly apparent to all).
>           ----------Ken Kinman
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
> these methods:
> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

More information about the Taxacom mailing list