Characters.

[John Grehan]

If one wants to be ruled by definitions of one's choice then one is
always going to have trouble - but that trouble is not mine. Definitions
of terms always vary and always will. Witness various discussions on
this list arguing over differences of opinion about definitions of
various terms (and not just cladistics). And 'newer' terminology is not
necessarily any less confused than older and, in the example cited by
Don, does not change anything (it was clear that Don understood what I
was talking about). Even in panbiogeography there is more than one
definition of, for example, a node. In the end definitions don't matter.

It's also ironic to see some berate my supposed lack of cladistic
understanding only to see others disagree with their supposedly
authoritative position. 

John Grehan

-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom Discussion List [mailto:TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU] On
Behalf Of Don.Colless at CSIRO.AU

Oh dear. Here we go again, on an unacknowledged distinction between
"character" and "character state"! In the latter terminology only a
CHARACTER STATE can be primitive, etc. If John wishes to adhere to an
older, confused terminology, it's his privilege to do so - but he's
going to find trouble in discussions in TAXACOM.

Don Colless,
Div of Entomology, CSIRO,
GPO Box 1700,
Canberra. 2601.
Email: don.colless at csiro.au
Tuz li munz est miens envirun