The repugnant and the mature in phylogenetic inference: a temporal similarity and historical identity

被引:57
作者
Kluge, AG [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Michigan, Museum Zool, Ann Arbor, MI 48109 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1016/S0748-3007(03)00072-0
中图分类号
Q [生物科学];
学科分类号
07 ; 0710 ; 09 ;
摘要
The significance of "being similar" in the inference of species relationships is refuted once again (see also Hennig, 1966, Phylogenetic Systematics, Univ. of Illinois Press, Urbana, IL). Without merit is Rieppel and Kearney's (Biol. J. Linn. Soc., 2002, 75, 59-82) claim that submitting the relational property of topological similarity, their preferred definition of character, to falsifying tests of similarity benefits that kind of inference. Such a priori uses of similarity, in character analysis, are consistent with observational theory, where a character is defined intensionally in terms of immutable properties. However, the induced hypotheses that follow from this theory, not the deductive test that Rieppel and Kearney wanted, remain controversial, because their predictability is a consequence of circular reasoning, and their projectabality fails empirically from incongruent observation reports. Further, a category mistake is made when the abstract, similarity-defined, group of organisms is reified, as a part of history. In addition, Rieppel and Kearney failed to provide a special theory for similarity, which renders similarity scientifically repugnant (Quine, 1969, Ontological Relativity and Other Essays, Columbia Univ. Press, New York). A return to Hennig's (1966) evolutionary concept of evidence, as transformation series, is urged, and from which a testable character hypothesis can be formulated. There is no one operation for determining character states in this system-it can be anything that leads to the testable hypothesis of synapomorphy, as an historical identity relation. Character compatibility and conjunction, but not similarity, provide a priori tests in phylogenetic character analysis. In turn, the phylogenetic system of inference leads to explanations of homology, as historical identities, which exemplifies the goal of achieving a mature state of historical knowledge (not of Quine, 1969). Such maturity obtains from attempts to falsify hypotheses of species relationships with severely tested evidence, not from induction of "the" observation statement that Rieppel and Kearney sought to justify their true belief in a hypothesis of relationships. (C) 2003 The Willi Hennig Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:356 / 368
页数:13
相关论文
共 107 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 2012, NAT METHODS
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1963, PRINCIPLES NUMERICAL
[3]  
[Anonymous], 1997, METAPHYSICS ORIGIN S
[4]  
[Anonymous], HYDROBIOLOGIA, DOI DOI 10.1007/S10750-004-2397-6
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1919, IDEALISTISCHE MORPHO
[6]   CLASSES AND CLADISTS [J].
BEATTY, J .
SYSTEMATIC ZOOLOGY, 1982, 31 (01) :25-34
[7]  
Bock W.J., 1989, Zoologische Beitraege, V32, P327
[8]   PHILOSOPHICAL FOUNDATIONS OF CLASSICAL EVOLUTIONARY CLASSIFICATION [J].
BOCK, WJ .
SYSTEMATIC ZOOLOGY, 1973, 22 (04) :375-392
[9]   DISCUSSION OF CONCEPT OF HOMOLOGY [J].
BOCK, WJ .
ANNALS OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF SCIENCES, 1969, 167 (A1) :71-&
[10]  
BOCK WJ, 1969, SYST BIOL, P411