Abstract
Cusset’s paper is very difficult to comment on, because it differs from ordinary historical-theoretical papers. It is comparable to a morphological study which, instead of focussing on plants, addresses itself to plant morphologists themselves. While plant morphologists recognize stems, leaves and roots in a plant body, Cusset identifies the components of morphological thought. That is, he classifies theories and their postulates (called principles) and establishes repeating, homologous parts - all on a background of a phylogeny of morphological schools.
Keywords
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Hammen, L. van der. 1981. Type-concept, higher classification and evolution. Acta Biotheor. 30: 3–48.
Losev, A.F. 1979. Plato’s objective idealism and its tragic fortune. In: Kessidi, F. Kh. (ed.). Plato and his epoch. ‘Nauka’, Moscow, pp. 9–57 (in Russian).
Rozov, M.A. 1977. Problems of the empirical analysis of scientific knowledge. ‘Nauka’, Novosibirsk (in Russian).
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1982 Martinus Nijhoff / Dr W. Junk Publishers, The Hague
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Meyen, S.V. (1982). Commentary on Dr. Cusset’s Paper. In: Sattler, R. (eds) Axioms and Principles of Plant Construction. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7636-8_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-7636-8_3
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-009-7638-2
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-7636-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive