[Taxacom] RES: south-west Australia

[Robinwbruce at aol.com]

Hi Curtis,
 
Thank you for your reply.
 
Perhaps I do sell statistics short, but that is of little consequence, the  
point remains.
 
Indeed the human mind is excellent at seeing pattern, even to the extent of 
 creating a science of meteorology based partly around a taxonomy of 
clouds.  Even Judy Collins' musical intervention in the 1970's could not arrest 
its  progress. Would that the same could be said of biogeography.
 
With regard to multi-dimensional patterns, to my reading, that is exactly  
what Croizat did over a period of decades, by mapping organisms on global  
fronts via a generative (not a formal) taxonomic framework; patterns  
repeated, and repeated, and repeated, and repeated. At what point does repeated  
happenstance become more than coincidence, and what do we call it? Clouds'  
illusions?
 
Croizat,1952 (Manual of Phytogeography), lacks the confidence and precision 
 of Croizat, 1964 (Space, Time, Form). What happened in between? A lot more 
 mapping and a lot more thinking; simple, pragmatic empiricism; maps 
geographical  and geological, taxonomies, a pencil and thought. Two cherished 
notions of  biology were at some time set-aside by him; centre of origin, and 
special  status for the taxonomic rank of species. A child would tell you to 
where and to  what these two notions are linked; and for better  and worse, 
these notions have shaped our intellectual landscape  for 150 years. So can 
we escape that ideology, that happy-clappy land where  we are told how and 
what to think and where we all must wear short  trousers, and then can we 
re-embrace empiricism, and perhaps even try  to think for ourselves? We can all 
choose.
 
Perhaps panbiogeography is just a side-track, winding through the parish  
lanes and the annals of life, but that is at least true to origins of  
natural history. I would rather follow a track towards truth, than an  ideological 
highway to a comfort zone.
  
With regard to eccentricities; to be human is to be eccentric;  ecce homo.
 
Thank you for your interest
 
Robin
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
In a message dated 6/24/2011 6:02:01 P.M. GMT Daylight Time,  
lists at curtisclark.org writes:

On  6/24/2011 7:50 AM, Robinwbruce at aol.com wrote:
> In systems where we are  exploring generalities of  uncertain natures I 
> do think that use  of statistical logic may be premature;
I think you sell statistics short  here. Although parametric statistics 
has a lot of assumptions, there are  many other statistical tools for 
pattern analysis (if I were a  statistician, I could suggest some). The 
value of this approach is  twofold: (1) the human mind is superb at 

seeing pattern, even when it  doesn't exist, and statistical tools 
provide an independent check, and (2)  the human mind in contrast often 
has trouble seeing actual patterns in  multidimensional space, and these 
techniques can suggest patterns that we  might not otherwise see.
> I do not claim to be a panbiogeographer, just  a biologist; but Croizat 
> is, to my mind, a very important figure in  20th century biology, 
> others are free to disagree.
When I first  learned of Croizat's work, I thought "this is probably 
important", and I  still don't discount the basic ideas (assuming I 
understand them  correctly), but, within the culture of science, 
panbiogeography is on a  side track, no doubt due to Croizat's own 
eccentricities. I would venture  that it will become mainstream only if 
its current practicioners reinvent  it, or more likely when it is 
rediscovered in the future, much as genetics  was.



-- 
--
Curtis Clark
Cal Poly  Pomona