Taxonomy as working hypothesis

[Michael Gochfeld]

When I was in training and the cladists and Mayrists were at war, Donn 
Rosen (AMNHl fish cladist) emphasized that all phylogenetic trees should 
be considered "hypotheses" to be tested continually in the light of new 
data (new characters). 

To him, taxonomy was merely something that we temporarily imposed on the 
current understanding of relationships, and wasn't to be taken very 
seriously. 

Unfortunately, I found the cladistic work (at the time at least) to be 
circular, since people had a priori notions of what constituted the taxa 
which they then studied with regard to the various "...morphies", which 
allowed them to re-sort the trees, each time new characters were added. 

Also, I was never able to accept the notion that each character that we 
could divine carried equivalent weight (information). 

Mike Gochfeld
 

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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