Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2006 Sep-Oct;67(5):385-8.

[Classical and non-classical taxonomy: another view]

[Article in Russian]
  • PMID: 17100100
Review

[Classical and non-classical taxonomy: another view]

[Article in Russian]
A P Rasnitsyn. Zh Obshch Biol. 2006 Sep-Oct.

Abstract

Biological taxonomy has never been a really classical science, if to consider the latter as seeking for universal laws and eternal truth (Pavlinov, 2006, and references therein). Biological taxonomy takes its origin from the folk one which is non-classical in that it is seeking for natural boundaries (hiati) within the observed biodiversity, rather than to impose ideal (universal and eternal) borderlines upon the biodiversity. Discussion between the classical and non-classical approaches started since Plato has explicated both the classical method of logic dichotomy and non-classical method of the folk taxonomy as a metaphor of cutting the nature at its joins. This discussion has been continuing till now, with the most classical approach being the cladistic one, and the least classical the phenetic one. The phyletic approach as defined by Ponomarenko & Rasnitsyn (1971; phylistic after Rasnitsyn, 1996) is also non-classical, although not as strict as the phenetic one.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles