Confusion in cladism
In Phylogenetic Systematics (1966), Willi Hennig conflates the Linnaean hierarchy with what Hennig refers to as the “divisional hierarchy”. In doing so, he lays the foundations of that school of biological taxonomy known as “cladism” on a philosophically ambiguous basis. This paper compares and contrasts the two hierarchies and demonstrates that Hennig conflates them. It shows that Hennig's followers also conflate them. Finally, it illuminates five persistent problems in cladism by suggesting that they arise from Hennig's original confusion.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- Eldredge, N. and J. Cracraft: 1980, Phylogenetic Patterns and the Evolutionary Process, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Gregg, J. R.: 1954, The Language of Taxonomy, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Hennig, W.: 1966, Phylogenetic Systematics, trans. D. D. Davis and R. Zangerl, University of Illinois Press, Urbana.Google Scholar
- Hull, D. L.: 1970, ‘Contemporary Systematic Philosophies’, Annual Review of Ecology Systematics 1, 19–54.Google Scholar
- Hull, D. L.: 1976, ‘The Limits of Cladism’, Systematic Zoology 28, 416–40.Google Scholar
- Mayr, E.: 1974, ‘Cladistic Analysis or Cladistic Classification?’, in E. Mayr, Evolution and the Diversity of Life, Harvard University Press, Cambridge MA, pp. 433–76.Google Scholar
- Nelson, G. and N. Platnick: 1981, Systematics and Biogeography, Cladistics and Vicariance, Columbia University Press, New York.Google Scholar
- Ridley, M:, 1986, Evolution and Classification, The Reformation of Cladism, Longman, London.Google Scholar
- Woodger, J. H.: 1952, ‘From Biology to Mathematics’, British Journal of Philosophy of Science 3, 1–21.Google Scholar