Revolution

[ROGER HYAM]

Dear All,

James Lyons-Weiler made an interesting point in reply to the Eye Eye
problem.

He said:
"Kuhn's take on the matter would be that progress in taxonomy can only
occur when a critical mass of common thought renders an old paradigm
obsolete, and ushers in a new one.  I don't foresee a successful
revolution in taxonomy as a process anytime soon."

I have argued for some time that we are approaching a revolutionary
paradigm shit in taxonomy. It is  comparable to the Copernican
paradigm shift. Prior to the acceptance of Copernicus' views the
explanations for the movements of planitary bodies were getting more
and more complex with an increasing number of  anomalies. Is this
not similar to what is happening in taxonomy? Certainly it is in
higher plants. The exceptions to the rule are growing all the time.
Surely if the diversity was "atomisable" as we are presuming we would
have finished with vascular plants by now. (Could all be having fun
with phylogenies in stead of fretting over what our terminal taxa
should be?!)

When ever I mention this to people who know about paradigm shifts
(but not necessarily taxonomy) they imply (very politely) that I am
talking out of my hat.

What do taxacommers think?

Roger.