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

Re: Making Up Names _versus_ Emending Names

Philidor11 (philidor11@snet.net) wrote:

<....Relationship could eventually change a name generated by
description (similar to a 'false negative'), but any such change
would be slow.>

I wrote:

<<No. I'm rarely surprised in this case because I hold no
paradigms to be true. If birds are not descdant from any
theropod or dinosaur, or whatever, I won't be surprised, I hold
it neither true nor false, but as a strict possibility; just
that this one has a greater probability of being actual, versus
the counterarguments.>>

to which Philidor11 wrote:

<This certainly would be a good argument for not basing a system
of nomenclature on a slightly better probability, because as you
say this makes change expectable.>

  Change should be expected, as all paradigms are possible. We
consider some to have "overwhelming" data to support them that
we take them as "given" they exist. Therein lies the trap: the

<But then you argue:

<<Similarly, I hold that an organism is better represented in a
phylogeny if its ancestors are considered as part of the

<When you say 'lineage' I think you mean rules for naming?>
Because names must respond to a change in identified ancestors,
you would in fact expect to see many changes in names, no?.>

  In lineage, I can use one of the following definitions:
relationships as defined by ancestry, and the nomenclature used
to approximate this. Now I know my grandad George and my dad are
related, and I know how. I can represent my lineage on my
Headden side and my Rasmussen side, depending on my convergent
lineages in this sense, and say, on the other hand, that aside
from this "family" I am a part of, that I am a Headden. My
personal classification is both terms together, but we are too
used to using the first. That names are passed with genes has
made the two systems convergent and nearly inseparable in
European descent. Not so in other cultures, such as the Amerind
ones, where names did not depend on ancestry, thus personal
classification was never based on ancestry, and no problems
arose from being a "Capulet" rather than a "Montague" in spite
of your personal convictions or relationship.

<You seem to be sacrificing stability for teaching about views
of ancestry.>

  I advocate stability, but if it is to stability rather than an
attempt to clarify relationship that one comes to on occasion
("Now, where does *Nomingia* or those pesky titanosaurs best
fit?") where one must be even-handed are arbitrary, I'll choose
relationship even if it makes something unstable. As others said
yesterday (Phil Cantino and Scott Redhead were debating on the
PhyloCode list on the subject) the system can be altered and
should to reflect an attempt to resolve a system of portraying
organisms without subjective forms of formatting their
relationships. I'm not referring to ranks, by the way, but am
being general. In an ideal situation, as I see it, anyway.

<If I read a separate post correctly, you'd even be including
the name of a theorist and publication date in the 'emended'
scientific name of an animal. I'd hate to be a textbook
publisher using this system if I'm understanding you correctly. 
I thought map makers and geography texts had a problem after the
Soviet Union broke up...>

 I'd also hate to be an editor in this situation. Logistically,
its difficult. However, applying the names in the spirit of the
practice, this would be better than taking someone's name and
sticking it on a name that was not coined by that person -- it's
unfair to them to ascribe an act they did not perform, or to the
person who actually did it, who now does not have this
ascription and _his/her_ acheivements have gone unrecognized. I
did this as a formal means of writing the name, instead of being
troubled one way or the other. The best solution would be not to
emend names unless absolutely neccessary (preoccupied names, for
instance, or in the PhyloCode, homodefinitional taxa).

  Hope this helps a little more, Philidor11,

Jaime A. Headden

  Where the Wind Comes Sweeping Down the Pampas!!!!

Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices