[Taxacom] Binomial Nomenclature - was: "cataloguing hypotheses & not real things"

[Dan Lahr]

Hello all,

Cristian, let me quickly summarize my view in case you have not read the
previous e-mails.

The binomial system is illogical because:

1. Creates an obligatory link to classification, when the goal of
nomenclature is to stably attach an identifier (nomen) to an entity
(supposedly the species, but in reality type specimen or population in the
case of culturable organisms). A binomen is one part classification (the
genus) and one part identifier.  The genus part of the name is superfluous
to achieving the nomenclatural goal.

2. Because there are two names when one was needed, it increases complexity
in the system without necessity. You can look at this several ways, Ocham's
razor, statistical models, but the generally agreed upon idea is that
simple is better.


Paul, you said:

"Logic has its place, but applying logic will usually give
no better results than the premises one started with."

I am sorry but I have no idea what you meant with this. A rhetorical
statement that applies to all human endeavour, for good or bad, and does
not forward the discussion.

Ashley,

The mononomial system is not a mutually exclusive to a hierarchical
classification.  You would still get both worlds using it, only instead of
two names for a species, you would use one. You would still have genera.
One interesting example that has been discussed in this list ad infinitum
is that you would have Drosophila-melanogaster (mononomen), and this would
simply be transferred to the genus Sophophora, and nobody would bat an eye.


My conclusion is that we are using an unnecessarily intricate system that
could easily be reduced to less parameters, thus increasing information
retention in the entire system.  The only reason we still use it is because
it is in use.

Like the Parnassians were doing "art for art's sake", and ended up caring
so much about metric that they stopped caring about content, I say we are
doing "Linnean nomenclature for Linnean nomenclature's sake!"

Dan




On Wed, Sep 4, 2013 at 4:41 PM, Ashley Nicholas <Nicholasa at ukzn.ac.za>wrote:

> Hi Curtis -- I agree fully. That is why I think that multiple
> approaches/solutions/hypotheses should be encouraged. That is why I do not
> like the one size fits all option that is being pushed. There is room for
> both a non-hierarchical evolutionary based monomial system and a
> classification using binomials (and descriptions and keys). I think in both
> mediums (and benefit enormously from the fact I do this). A monomial system
> without keys would have made it impossible for me to key out that plant
> that poisoned those two boys. I did it the old fashion (useful way).
> However, as an evolutionist I also know that old fashioned classifications
> are hugely problematic in actually understanding the origin and diversity
> of organisms. Why is there not room for both? If I can work simultaneously
> in both constructs -- I am sure others can too. Dictatorial lists of names
> in current use are an anathema to me as they go against the very way
> empirical science should work.
>
> Cheers
> Ashley
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:
> taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Curtis Clark
> Sent: 04 September 2013 16:19
> To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Binomial Nomenclature - was: "cataloguing
> hypotheses & not real things"
>
> On 2013-09-04 4:21 AM, Ashley Nicholas wrote:
> > Great quote with some truth. But if the choice is between being logical
> and being illogical -- I think I will choose logic thank you.
>
> It concerns me that there is not so much emphasis on "useful".
>
> --
> Curtis Clark        http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark
> Biological Sciences                   +1 909 869 4140
> Cal Poly Pomona, Pomona CA 91768
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>



-- 
___________________
Daniel J. G. Lahr, PhD
Assist. Prof., Dept of Zoology,
Univ. of Sao Paulo, Brazil
+ 55 (11) 3091 0948