David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Cambridge University Press (2001)
The question of whether biologists should continue to use the Linnaean hierarchy is a hotly debated issue. Invented before the introduction of evolutionary theory, Linnaeus's system of classifying organisms is based on outdated theoretical assumptions, and is thought to be unable to provide accurate biological classifications. Marc Ereshefsky argues that biologists should abandon the Linnaean system and adopt an alternative that is more in line with evolutionary theory. He traces the evolution of the Linnaean hierarchy from its introduction to the present. He illustrates how the continued use of this system hampers our ability to classify the organic world, and then goes on to make specific recommendations for a post-Linnaean method of classification. Accessible to a wide range of readers by providing introductory chapters to the philosophy of classification and the taxonomy of biology, the book will interest both scholars and students of biology and the philosophy of science.
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Buy the book||$19.86 used (86% off) $41.07 new (70% off) $134.99 direct from Amazon Amazon page|
|Call number||QH83.E73 2001|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Michael Devitt (2008). Resurrecting Biological Essentialism. Philosophy of Science 75 (3):344-382.
Marc Ereshefsky (2010). Microbiology and the Species Problem. Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):553-568.
Tim Lewens (2012). Human Nature: The Very Idea. Philosophy and Technology 25 (4):459-474.
Marc Ereshefsky & Thomas A. C. Reydon (2015). Scientific Kinds. Philosophical Studies 172 (4):969-986.
Joeri Witteveen (2015). Naming and Contingency: The Type Method of Biological Taxonomy. Biology and Philosophy 30 (4):569-586.
Similar books and articles
J. Dupre (1996). Review of Sober's "Philosophy of Biology". [REVIEW] Philosophical Explorations 63:143-145.
James Maclaurin & Kim Sterelny (2008). What is Biodiversity? University of Chicago Press.
Joel Cracraft (1987). Species Concepts and the Ontology of Evolution. Biology and Philosophy 2 (3):329-346.
Ernst Mayr (1996). What is a Species, and What is Not? Philosophy of Science 63 (2):262-277.
Marc Ereshefsky (2002). Linnaean Ranks: Vestiges of a Bygone Era. Proceedings of the Philosophy of Science Association 2002 (3):S305-S315.
Patricia A. Williams (1992). Confusion in Cladism. Synthese 91 (1-2):135 - 152.
Matthew H. Haber (2005). Book Review the Poverty of the Linnaean Hierarchy. [REVIEW] Philosophy of Science 72 (3):491-494.
Marc Ereshefsky (1997). The Evolution of the Linnaean Hierarchy. Biology and Philosophy 12 (4):493-519.
M. Ereshefsky (2001). Names, Numbers and Indentations: A Guide to Post-Linnaean Taxonomy. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 32 (2):361-383.
Marc Ereshefsky (1994). Some Problems with the Linnaean Hierarchy. Philosophy of Science 61 (2):186-205.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads30 ( #126,248 of 1,790,186 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #320,604 of 1,790,186 )
How can I increase my downloads?