The type in taxonomy is not meant to be a particularly typical specimen, but simply a reference specimen suited to serve as a 'name bearer' whenever doubt arises concerning the identity of a species. The minimum requirement is that the specimen reflects some differentiating characteristics of the species. In analogy, only such individuals should be made the type of an ideological system as adhere to the principal ideologies of that system. Only such an evolutionist could serve as type for Darwinism who on the whole accepts gradual evolution and, as the major moving force in evolution, natural selection. It is very questionable whether the type-method would be of any use where highly heterogeneous, open, or rapidly evolving systems are involved. When the meaning of a system is changing it is less confusing to redefine it than to coin a new term for each change.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 54,466
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Assessing Evolutionary Epistemology.Michael Bradie - 1986 - Biology and Philosophy 1 (4):401-459.
Race and Reference.Adam Hochman - 2019 - Biology and Philosophy 34 (2):32.
Answers to These Comments.Ernst Mayr - 1987 - Biology and Philosophy 2 (2):212-225.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
18 ( #550,410 of 2,374,861 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #559,821 of 2,374,861 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes