Ontology and values anchor indigenous and grey nomenclatures: a case study in lichen naming practices among the Samí, Sherpa, Scots, and Okanagan

Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 84:101340 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Ethnobotanical research provides ample justification for comparing diverse biological nomenclatures and exploring ways that retain alternative naming practices. However, how (and whether) comparison of nomenclatures is possible remains a subject of discussion. The comparison of diverse nomenclatural practices introduces a suite of epistemic and ontological difficulties and considerations. Different nomenclatures may depend on whether the communities using them rely on formalized naming conventions; cultural or spiritual valuations; or worldviews. Because of this, some argue that the different naming practices may not be comparable if the ontological commitments employed differ. Comparisons between different nomenclatures cannot assume that either the naming practices or the object to which these names are intended to apply identifies some universally agreed upon object of interest. Investigating this suite of philosophical problems, I explore the role grey nomenclatures play in classification. ‘Grey nomenclatures’ are defined as those that employ names that are either intentionally or accidentally non-Linnaean. The classification of the lichen thallus (a symbiont) has been classified outside the Linnaean system by botanists relying on the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN). But, I argue, the use of grey names is not isolated and does not occur exclusively within institutionalized naming practices. I suggest, ‘grey names’ also aptly describe nomenclatures employed by indigenous communities such as the Samí of Northern Finmark, the Sherpa of Nepal, and the Okanagan First Nations. I pay particular attention to how naming practices are employed in these communities; what ontological commitments they hold; for what purposes are these names used; and what anchors the community’s nomenclatural practices. Exploring the history of lichen naming and early ethnolichenological research, I then investigate the stakes that must be considered for any attempt to preserve, retain, integrate, or compare the knowledge contained in both academically formalized grey names and indigenous nomenclatures in a way that preserves their source-specific informational content.

Similar books and articles

Of elephants and errors: naming and identity in Linnaean taxonomy.Joeri Witteveen & Staffan Müller-Wille - 2020 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 42 (4):1-34.
The galaxy of the non-Linnaean nomenclature.Alessandro Minelli - 2019 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 41 (3):31.
Personal Names: Embodiment, Differentiation, Exclusion, and Belonging.Gisli Palsson - 2014 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 39 (4):618-630.
Naming the Ethological Subject.Etienne S. Benson - 2016 - Science in Context 29 (1):107-128.
Names, Naming and Name-Using Practices.Dolf Rami - 2016 - In Piotr Stalmaszczyk & Luis Fernandez Moreno (eds.), Philosophical Approaches to Proper Names. Peter Lang. pp. 55--92.
Wittgenstein on Proper Names.Bernd Peter Ottokar Frohmann - 1982 - Dissertation, University of Toronto (Canada)
Naming, and Naming God.Jerome I. Gellman - 1993 - Religious Studies 29 (2):193 - 216.


Added to PP

541 (#3,056)

6 months
159 (#119,888)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Catherine Elizabeth Kendig
Michigan State University

References found in this work

Natural Kindness.Matthew H. Slater - 2015 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 66 (2):375-411.
Sorting Things out: Classification and Its Consequences.Geoffrey C. Bowker & Susan Leigh Star - 2001 - Journal of the History of Biology 34 (1):212-214.

View all 14 references / Add more references