[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]


<<The source of the connection in these groups is evolutionary and rules for
naming are established, but is there anything necessarily anti-evolutionary
about calling birds a separate group?>

<I don't quite understand what you're saying.  Typology is a way of thinking
where the major groups of animals, plants, fungi, whatever, are set.>>

I meant that professionals have decided to identify a group called Reptilia,
for example, and to include certain animals in that group.  They knew of
course that there were ancestors of animals included in Reptilia that are
not part of Reptilia.  They could have decided to call birds a separate
group also, but chose not to.  Fair enough, but the decision they made was
not based on opposing typology (I assume).  Had they decided to make birds a
separate group, the decision would still have been based on evolution and
not on favoring typology.   I just wanted to clarify that the decision was
not made on the basis of typology/anti-typology.