What's in a name ?

[Kondla, Norbert FOR:EX]

Actually I think that phylogenetic taxonomy has already gained a foothold
among those who find value in this approach, and I am one of those. Of
course many other people prefer a different conceptual paradigm and one's
expectations of what a name communicates is very much driven by these
differences.  When the various paradigms and species concepts and data sets
and opinions all point in the same direction; there is little debate about
the "correct" taxonomic interpretation. In many cases these differences
point in different directions and results in the debates that we have on
"correctness" of names. It is these taxa which are the topic of debate which
should in my opinion be clear priorities for further research in hopes that
a common and coherent direction can be established over time.  But still, as
someone else pointed out, all this is a construct of our human minds and the
butterflies really do not care about what we think :-)

-----Original Message-----
From: OLIVER JEFFREY CATLIN [mailto:Jeffrey.Oliver at Colorado.EDU]
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2001 8:56 AM
To: Jean-Michel MAES
Cc: Kondla, Norbert FOR:EX; leps-l at lists.yale.edu
Subject: RE: What's in a name ?



On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Jean-Michel MAES wrote:

> same species. A name is nothing to do with phylogeny, it's only a name.

Alas, will phylogenetic taxonomy never gain a foothold?

Jeff Oliver
jeffrey.oliver at colorado.edu

 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl