[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: [Making Up Names _versus_ Emending Names]
Philidor11 (firstname.lastname@example.org) wrote:
<Isn't the choice to give any group a separate name at an
equivalent level subjective? Remember, too, the principle that
it's the idea (or poem or opera, etc) and not the person. Some
fairly reprehensible people have made essential contributions.
And, as we've discussed, it is possible to do objective
systematic thinking that includes some non-evolutionary (as
opposed to anti-evolutionary) premises. The argument from
aspersion on motives kind of rankles.>
I made the statement because there was in fact a motive for
the method in which the concepts were formulated (esp.
typological Linnaean-based hierarchies). However, I beleive that
Linné contributed greatly to science by placing taxa into these
kinds of groups, that allowed others to form refinements of his
masonry. A smelter may form the steel, but it is the smith who
forms it. They may be the same, but history tends to
differentiate these individuals. I have no opinions on
beleif-driven concepts except to note means by which they can be
applied [and if not, rejected, in part or in whole]. Even if the
motive is not in the best scientific frame, this has never been
the criterion to my considering it. I understand how, in what I
wrote, this was in fact how it could be taken, so I appologize.
Jaime A. Headden
Where the Wind Comes Sweeping Down the Pampas!!!!
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices