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

Re: Kileskus and Proceratosauridae

Hm. So tautology =/= circular reasoning, but it still needs to be a
complete statement, not just a redundant phrase.

I'll take a stab at "clade" . . . etymologically, the root of the term
ultimately means "branch," so may I propose that if we take it
literally, we have to consider clades as full and proper *branches* of
the tree of life. Excluding the tip of a branch at some arbitrary
point means, by default, that one is not looking at *a* branch, but
rather at a *portion* of a branch, much like half an apple is not *an*
apple and person's arm is not itself a person. If we truly wish to
consider a clade/branch for what it is, we can't delimit a *portion*
and refer to it as though it were a *whole.* (Branches of course can
be subdivided into smaller branches, but each one has an identity
based on the tip or tips at one end and where it meets a thicker
branch at the other end. Excluding the/a tip obscures the identity of
the branch.)

Does that at least make sense semantically?