Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Cladism, Monophyly and Natural Kinds

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Cladism, today the dominant school of systematics in biology, includes a classification component-the view that classification ought to reflect phylogeny only, such that all and only taxa are monophyletic (i.e. consist of an ancestor and all its descendants)-and a metaphysical component- the view that all and only real groups or kinds of organisms are monophyletic. For the most part these are seen as amounting to much the same thing, but I argue they can and should be distinguished, in particular that cladists about classification need not accept the typically cladist view about real groups or kinds. Cladists about classification can and should adopt an explanatory criterion for the reality of groups or kinds, on which being monophyletic is neither necessary nor sufficient for being real or natural. Thus the line of reasoning that has rightly led to cladism becoming dominant within systematics, and the attractive line of reasoning in the philosophical literature that advocates a more liberal approach to natural kinds, are seen to be, contrary to appearances, compatible.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)39-68
JournalCroatian Journal of Philosophy
Volume22
Issue number64
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 7 Jun 2022

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cladism, Monophyly and Natural Kinds'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this