Original paper
Systematics and science: the role of authority
Williams, David M.; Round, Frank E.
Nova Hedwigia Band 59 Heft 1-2 (1994), p. 219 - 223
8 references
published: Sep 12, 1994
ArtNo. ESP050005901017, Price: 29.00 €
Abstract
“In 1867 Huxley revolutionized the classification of birds themselves, finding salient differences not in webbed feet or aquatic habits, but particularly in certain small, seemingly insignificant bones of the palate. ” (Irvine 1955, p. 300). “It is unscientific and discourteous to dismiss an idea merely because it disagrees with the current orthodoxy.” (Mann 1990, p. 24). In a previous age the vagaries of taxonomic practice were such that the principles which governed the construction of a classification were not only unclear but often contradictory. In the last 20 years or so systematists have addressed these issues and, for better or worse, have come to the conclusion that, at least, principles are needed and must be established. Not everyone agrees on these principles; neither should they, for this is the way of science. Science moves forward, as does the theoretical and practical aspects of systematics. Clearly, we should avoid not discussing the notions with which we work and revise them accordingly. More importantly, we should avoid appealing solely to authority to decide which principles should apply, no matter how much we feel that particular authority is worth appealing to (cf. Mann 1990, especially p. 23-24).
Keywords
vagaries • classification • taxonomic practice • palate • principles • authority