Foundational issues concerning taxa and taxon names.

نویسنده

  • Marc Ereshefsky
چکیده

In a series of articles, Rieppel (2005, Biol. Philos. 20:465-487; 2006a, Cladistics 22:186-197; 2006b, Systematist 26:5-9), Keller et al. (2003, Bot. Rev. 69:93-110), and Nixon and Carpenter (2000, Cladistics 16:298-318) criticize the philosophical foundations of the PhyloCode. They argue that species and higher taxa are not individuals, and they reject the view that taxon names are rigid designators. Furthermore, they charge supporters of the individuality thesis and rigid designator theory with assuming essentialism, committing logical inconsistencies, and offering proposals that render taxonomy untestable. These charges are unsound. Such charges turn on confusions over rigid designator theory and the distinction between kinds and individuals. In addition, Rieppel's, Keller et al.'s, and Nixon and Carpenter's proposed alternatives are no better and have their own problems. The individuality thesis and rigid designator theory should not be quickly abandoned.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Feathered dinosaurs, flying dinosaurs, crown dinosaurs, and the name “Aves”

The taxon name “Aves” is currently used for several different clades, a situation that violates the fundamental nomenclatural principle that, to minimize ambiguity, each taxon name should refer to a single taxon. To clarify this situation, we explore some general issues concerning the properties of the three classes of phylogenetic definitions, including: how names can be tied to clades through...

متن کامل

Circumscriptional names of higher taxa in Hexapoda

Testing non-typified names by applying rules of circumscriptional nomenclature shows that in most cases the traditional usage can be supported. However, the original circumscription of several widely used non-typified names does not fit the taxa they are applied to. Here I discuss names historically applied to the taxa whose correct circumscriptional names should be Hexapoda, Amyocerata, Triplu...

متن کامل

REPRINT Biological Nomenclature from Linnaeus to the PhyloCode

Linnaeus and other 18th Century naturalists practiced nomenclature in a way that associated taxon names more strongly with taxa (groups) than with the categorical ranks of the taxonomic (“Linnaean”) hierarchy. For those early naturalists, ranks functioned merely as devices for indicating hierarchical position that did not affect the application or spelling of taxon names. Consequently, taxa did...

متن کامل

Linnaeaii, rank-based, and phylogenetic nomenclature: Restoring primacy to the link between names and taxa

de QueiroK, K. 2005. Linnaean, rank-based, and phylogenetic nomenclature: Restoring primacy to the link between names and taxa. Acta Univ. Lips. Symb. Bor. Upa. 33:3, 127-140. Uppsala, ISBN 91-554-6192-1. Linnaeus and other 18"" Century naturaii.sts practiced nomenclature in a way that associated laxon names more strongly with taxa (group.s) than with the categorical ranks of the taxonomic ("Li...

متن کامل

The Definitions of Species and Clade Names: A Reply to Ghiselin

Ghiselin (1993) has criticized my proposal (de Queiroz 1992) that phylogenetic definitions of taxon names (de Queiroz and Gauthier 1990) provide a means of reconciling the position that taxa are individuals (composite wholes) with the traditional method of defining taxon names in terms of necessary and sufficient properties (intensional definitions), which implies that taxa are classes. As Ghis...

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:
  • Systematic biology

دوره 56 2  شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2007