Acta Biotheoretica 45 (1):17-27 (1997)
Wilkinson (1991a) developed arguments that the distributions of primitive character states may delimit clades, and proposed a method that exploited the evidence of primitive character state distributions for inferring clades. Whiting and Kelly (1995) presented a critique of these ideas, arguing that they are logically incoherent and that the method does not succeed in its aims. This critique severely misrepresents the original arguments and the method, and amounts to no more than an attack on a straw man.
|Keywords||Philosophy Philosophy of Biology Evolutionary Biology|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Empirical Constraints for Perceptual Modeling.Charles R. Fox - 2003 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 26 (4):411-412.
Science and the Synthetic Method of the Critique of Pure Reason.Melissa McBay Merritt - 2006 - Review of Metaphysics 59 (3):517-539.
How Often Do We (Philosophy Professors) Commit the Straw Man Fallacy?Brian Ribeiro - 2008 - Teaching Philosophy 31 (1):27-38.
Conversing with Straw Men While Ignoring Dictators: A Reply to Roger Ames.Jack Donnelly - 1997 - Ethics and International Affairs 11 (1):207–213.
The Use of Primitive Character State Distributions in the Assessment of Holophyly.Mark Wilkinson - 1991 - Acta Biotheoretica 39 (1):37-46.
Synamorphy, Monophyly, and Cladistic Analysis: A Reply to Wilkinson.Michael F. Whiting & Lawrence M. Kelly - 1995 - Acta Biotheoretica 43 (3):249-257.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads8 ( #493,334 of 2,171,974 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #326,556 of 2,171,974 )
How can I increase my downloads?