[Taxacom] (no subject)

[Richard Zander]

Well, there's a problem with the dichotomy, Jim. There are three classifications, a traditional one based on morphology (expressed traits, anyway), a phylogenetic one based on a combination of morphology and phylogeny, and the phylocode. 
 
The trouble is that the phylogenetic one is gradually being changed more and more into a purely sister-group classification and the phylogenetic one is replacing the morphological one rapidly. "Them" is now "us." 
 
To fix this requires an evaluation of phylogenetic classification (e.g. APGII), and if the phylogenetic classification does not truly represent what we feel is the best way to present an evolutionarily based classification, then to publish an alternative in the field of one's expertise. Otherwise there will be a true dichotomy, a complely phylogenetic (holophyletic) classification and the phylocode. If we want anything else, we must do the work and present it in the marketplace of ideas with a thorogoing justification.
 
_______________________
Richard H. Zander
Missouri Botanical Garden
PO Box 299
St. Louis, MO 63166 U.S.A.
richard.zander at mobot.org
 

________________________________

From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of Jim Croft
Sent: Wed 4/1/2009 11:59 PM
To: Don.Colless at csiro.au
Cc: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] (no subject)



But we do...  one is used by 'us'... and the other is used by 'them'...

jim