[Taxacom] Are species real? Doesn't matter.

[Guido Mathieu]

Seems to me that much of the discussion is due to the use of the word species
for the 'entity', which occurs in nature regardless of being discovered,
observed, described... by men, as well as for the 'ID-entity', i.e. the
formalization (taxon, concept, hypothesis...) in which science tries to catch
that entity. 
   
Guido 

G. Mathieu
Research Group Spermatophytes
Ghent University, Belgium
www.peperomia.net


> If cladograms are graphic representations of explanatory hypotheses, 
> accounting for shared similarities, and we apply formal names to some 
> of those hypotheses, then why must 'species' only be considered 
> classes or individuals? If species are themselves explanatory 
> hypotheses, then neither the class nor the individual concept is 
> appropriate.
> 
> Names such as 'Homo' and 'Hominidae' refer to explanatory hypotheses, 
> not classes. Why then must 'Homo sapiens' be relegated to being a 
> class, when in fact the name refers to the past events that account 
> for the individual organisms observed now, i.e., a hypothesis? It 
> seems that the action of giving the name 'Homo sapiens' is no 
> different than giving the names 'Homo,'
> 'Hominidae,' 'Chordata,' etc.  All are placeholders for different 
> hypotheses that trace back to the observed organisms for which we seek 
> understanding.
> 
> Kirk
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> J. Kirk Fitzhugh, Ph.D.
> Curator of Polychaetes
> Invertebrate Zoology Section
> Research & Collections Branch
> Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History 900 Exposition Blvd Los 
> Angeles CA 90007
> 
> Phone:   213-763-3233
> FAX:       213-746-2999
> e-mail:   kfitzhug at nhm.org
> http://www.nhm.org/research/annelida/staff.html
> http://www.nhm.org/research/annelida/index.html
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~