If you want some real fun, sign on to the Taxacom mailing list and
post an opinion about whether a particular method is "cladistic" or
not.
But the heated exchange that might result is already anachronistic.
There's an expression in English, "It's all over but the shouting."
The shouting will go on for some time, but it's over. Whether or not
you agree with it, the matter's settled: the community now very much
considers that an organism's identity arises from its genetic
history, and that classification should as directly as possible
reflect that genetic history. Classification is about words, and it
helps very much to have the words we use reflect the concepts that we
think matter.
Yes, the questions of evolutionary history and classifications can be
separated, but I wouldn't say that a confusion between them hampered
the progress of evolutionary biology. A battle *within* evolutionary
biology between older and newer paradigms as to what emphasis
mattered (adaptive zones versus genetic history) was fought with
classification as the prize to be won. The fact that most adherents
to the new paradigm weren't concerned about classification, and many
of the traditionalists were, made it seem to the younger generations
as if progress was being hindered by a focus on classification. Of
course, since the battle was won long before the shouting stopped,
it's understandable why the younger generations felt burdened by the
unnecessary shouting.
Wayne
At 10:43 AM -0700 29.9.2009, Joe Felsenstein wrote:
When I wrote:
>As what classifications should be, or whether methods should be
>considered as making phylogenetic or phenetic classifications, I have my
>own position, that no one else seems to back (in public, anyway). I
>think that we should not think of these trees as classifications, and not
>call them phylogenetic classifications or phenetic classifications, but
>consider them as estimates of the phylogeny. The issue of how to classify
>is less important anyway.
Emmanuel Paradis responded -
I have the strong feeling that most users of R and its [phylo]genetics
packages are interested in the study of evolutionary processes, not in
classification (I rarely see questions about classification or
systematics here). So maybe most of us silently back Joe's position.
About the issue of how to classify, I think it is very important. The
point here is, in my view, that the confusion between classification and
evolution greatly hampered the progress of evolutionary biology, but the
situation has improved in recent years.
I can't speak for most users of R, but I do suspect that Emmanuel is
right in that there is agreement with this position among many younger
evolutionary biologists. But it is a sufficiently intimidating atmosphere
for them that they do not usually say that out loud. I have stuck my neck
out, mostly for the fun of it. The reactions among many systematists have
been strong -- they are really outraged, and figure that this is just
some arbitrary opinion of mine, which they are (barely) willing to tolerate.
I suppose the matter will become one of open discussion some day.
Anyway, back to R.
J.F.
----
Joe Felsenstein j...@gs.washington.edu
Department of Genome Sciences and Department of Biology,
University of Washington, Box 355065, Seattle, WA 98195-5065 USA
_______________________________________________
R-sig-phylo mailing list
R-sig-phylo@r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-phylo
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Wayne Maddison
Professor and Canada Research Chair
Depts. of Zoology and Botany and
Biodiversity Research Centre
& Director
Beaty Biodiversity Museum
6270 University Boulevard
University of British Columbia
Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z4 Canada
email: wmadd...@interchange.ubc.ca FAX: +1 604 822-2416
Mesquite: http://mesquiteproject.org
MacClade: http://macclade.org
Salticidae: http://salticidae.org
Tree of Life: http://tolweb.org
Beaty Biodiversity Museum: http://beatymuseum.ubc.ca
Home page: http://salticidae.org/wpm/home.html
_______________________________________________
R-sig-phylo mailing list
R-sig-phylo@r-project.org
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-sig-phylo
