[Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

[Richard Zander]

I think it is not a question of a pendulum swinging from one pole to
another, but that phylogenetic analysis is essential to standard
evolution-based taxonomy. It is the interpretations for classification
that cladists make of the analysis that are nontheory therefore
nonscience. Standard traditional taxonomists can easily subsume the
morphological and molecular results into their classifications, with
explanations of why these results fit into an evolutionary
classification. The pendulum isn't swinging at all. 
 
* * * * * * * * * * * * 
Richard H. Zander 
Missouri Botanical Garden, PO Box 299, St. Louis, MO 63166-0299 USA 
Web sites: http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/ and
http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/bfna/bfnamenu.htm
Modern Evolutionary Systematics Web site:
http://www.mobot.org/plantscience/resbot/21EvSy.htm


-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
[mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Kenneth Kinman
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2011 9:22 PM
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why Taxonomy does NOT matter

Hi Stephen,
        Good point.  A lot of these debates are the result of swinging
the pendulum too far one way or the other.  In the process, moderation
and eclectism gets overlooked.  Sounds sort of like the United States
Congress, where moderates almost never get media attention, while
non-moderates (on both sides) get almost all the media attention.
[snip]