Dictionary of Arguments

Philosophical and Scientific Issues in Dispute

Screenshot Tabelle Begriffes


Find counter arguments by entering NameVs… or …VsName.

Enhanced Search:
Search term 1: Author or Term Search term 2: Author or Term

together with

The author or concept searched is found in the following 2 entries.
Disputed term/author/ism Author
Order Mayr I 194
Numerical Phenomena: Goal: to avoid any arbitrariness and subjectivity. Up to 100 features that are not weighted. This leads to different classifications when using different feature sets. >Relevance, >Classification/Mayr, >Features/Mayr.
Classification cannot be gradually refined. a) "distance method" b) "thrift method".
I 195
Cladification/Mayr: (c. 1950) is based exclusively on genealogy. Only common derived features (apomorphies), no original features are taken into account. Each taxon consists of a branch of the genealogical tree, which includes the stem species of this branch and all its offspring (including "ex groups," i.e. highly modified offspring). Without any consideration of similarity!
> href="https://philosophy-science-humanities-controversies.com/search.php?x=2&y=11&volltext=Cladistic">Cladistics, >Similarity. Similarity/Darwin/Mayr: Similarity uses as many features as possible.
I 196
Classification/Darwin: shares with the cladification in contrast to the purely numerical phenomenology, that groupings are taken into account. Taxonomy/Tradition/Darwin: a taxon is monophyletic when all its members descend from the next common ancestor.
Taxon/Cladism: "holophyletic", demarcation of the taxa. (Both methods of hierarchies are purely genealogical).
Clade: does not correspond to a taxon in Darwin. A "Cladon" goes back to a root species (and includes it), that is, the kind that has the first apomorphic feature of this branch (Clade).
Cladification: shows well the phylogenetic aspects of the characteristics.
I 197
VsCladification/Cladism: 1. Most of the clades are very heterogeneous, other stem groups can be much more similar to the stem groups of the sibling groups than daughter groups (end stages).
Klade: does not correspond to a taxon at Darwin. A "Cladon" goes back to a root type (and includes it), that is, the kind that has the first apomorphic feature of this branch (Clade).
Cladification: shows well the phylogenetic aspects of the characteristics.
I 197
VsCladification/Cladism: 1. Most of the clusters are very heterogeneous, other groups can be much more similar to the parent groups of the sibling groups than daughter groups (end stages).
3. The determination to assign sibling groups the same rank is unrealistic. A sibling group, which has hardly developed further, and one who has undergone a drastic evolutionary change (for example, birds) would have to have the same categorical rank.
5. Each population requires to be ranked as a species even if they differ in only one characteristic (phylogenetic species concept).
6. A classification is more useful, the more features it takes into account.
7. Sibling groups are excluded from relationships, even if they are more closely related than remote offspring.
>Classification/Mayr, >Classification.
I 199
Each classification based on a single characteristic leads to heterogeneous, artificial taxa.
I 199
Multidimensional Order: the order of taxa in a printed line is forcibly one-dimensional. Cf. >Lists.
But common lineage is a three-dimensional phenomenon.
1. Derived taxa: behind those from which they are derived.
2. More specialized behind less specialized.
3. Modifications to the original sequence are to be avoided.

Mayr I
Ernst Mayr
This is Biology, Cambridge/MA 1997
German Edition:
Das ist Biologie Heidelberg 1998

Similarity Descartes Foucault I 85ff
Similarity/Descartes/DescartesVsSimilarity/Foucault: For Descartes, similarity is a confused mixture that needs to be analyzed in terms of identity/difference, measure, order. >Distictions, >Identity, >Reality.
Descartes does not reject comparisons. >Comparisons.
Transitivity (a = c) is only possible through comparisons.
Any knowledge is made through comparisons.
There are only two forms of comparison: measure and order.
Units and multiplicities can be measured, i.e. continuous and discontinuous units can be measured. Order. ((s) works without reference to externalities): from inside out.
Measure ((s): works from outside to inside (division).

Order/Descartes: I recognize the order between A and B by looking at nothing else but the mutual endpoint. One can recognize the order of things "not in their entities in detail", but by discovering the simplest being, and after this the next one.(1)
The comparison, on the other hand, requires with the help of the measure first a division, then the application of a common unity. >Order, >Unity.

Order: Comparison and measure here form the same thing: Progress without interruption. >Measurements.
Thus series are created whose first point is an entity from which one can have a view independently of any other, and where the other point is created with growing differences.
The distinction between identity and difference dissolves similarity.
The absolute character that one assigns to what is simple does not concern the being of things, but only the way in which they can be recognized.

New: The comparison only has the role of revealing the order of the world.
Tradition: The game of similarity was once unlimited. It was always possible to discover new similarities.
New: Now a finite enumeration will become possible.

1. Descartes, PHilosophische Werke I. Regeln zur Leitung des Geistes, Leipzig 1906 [Philosophische Bibliothek 26a] S. 81

Foucault I
M. Foucault
Les mots et les choses: Une archéologie des sciences humaines , Paris 1966 - The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences, New York 1970
German Edition:
Die Ordnung der Dinge. Eine Archäologie der Humanwissenschaften Frankfurt/M. 1994

Foucault II
Michel Foucault
l’Archéologie du savoir, Paris 1969
German Edition:
Archäologie des Wissens Frankfurt/M. 1981