fredag 27 april 2012

The route to Linnean systematics and cladistics

The fundamental problem for conceptualization is that reality is both discrete (ie, pattern) and continuous (ie, process) at the same time, despite that this state is a conceptual contradiction, in itself, in that discreteness (separation) and continuity are orthogonal (ie, can't be equal per definition). Single entities are both discrete and in a constant process of change at the same time, despite that it is contradictory. Reality is thus contradictory between state (ie, pattern) and change (ie, process) de facto. Morever, the fact that this contradiction is orthogonal means that it also is paradoxical, which Betrand Russel also showed empirically in 1901.

This real contradiction means that we (in conceptualization) have to keep discreteness (separation) and continuity consistently apart, ie, keep a consistent aisle between them, to avoid (conceptual) paradoxical contradiction. This did Aristotle accomplish on a fundamental level by his invention of an orthogonal tool for conceptualization that distinguishes "genera" and "species" on "generic" and "specific differences". The difference between "generic" and "specific" differences is that "generic" differences are pure otherness between entities (ie, lack of a common measure), whereas "specific" differences are differences in something they share. This tool provided the foundation for objective empirical science as we know it today.

About 2000 years later, the Swedish naturalist Carl von Linné discovered the consistent hierarchical mounting of such "genera with their species" (ie, keeping a consistent aisle between discreteness and continuity), that is, a hierarchical orthogonal system, which today is known as Linnean systematics. This kind of conceptual system (ie, a hierarchical orthogonal conceptualization) is thus the end of this route. It is what the fact that reality is both discrete (ie, pattern) and continuous (ie, process) at the same time leads us to.

About 150 years later, the English naturalist Charles Darwin presented his "theory on the origin of species", which he illustrated with a strictly bifurcating graph. This illustration is, however, a bit tricky to interpret consistently, since it uses stems and nodes to illustrate discreteness (pattern) and continuity (process), but does not distinguish them explicitly. This deficit did about 100 years later lure the German entomologist to conflate discreteness with continuity by conflating nodes with stems. This conflation appeared "natural" to Hennig, but did actually bring him back to a pre-Aristotelian idea originally formulated by Parmenides (ie, that reality is one, change is impossible, and existence is timeless, uniform, necessary, and unchanging), that is, the actual opposite to Darwin's theory. This ancient (pre-scientific) conflation was, in spite of that it (1) already had been shown to be contradictory by the ancient Greeks, (2) is the opposite to Darwin's theory and (3) is falsified by the fact that time is relative to space, adopted by many biological systematists. In this brand, it was called "cladistics" and does today have a strong influence on biological systematics.

The main problem with Hennig's conflation (ie, Parmenides' idea and today's cladistics) is that it transfers the paradoxical contradiction of reality into our conceptualization of reality, thereby entering the same vain search for a stable (ie, consistent) configuration of a paradoxical contradiction that reality obviously is in, instead of discussing reality consistently, as science does. The conflation does not change the fact that reality is orthogonally (ie, paradoxically) contradictory, but merely accepts orthogonal (paradoxical) contradiction. In this sense, the conflation is indeed "natural", as Hennig and cladists asserted and assert, but it is none-the less orthogonally (paradoxically) contradictory. It is a vain search for a void practical application of a orthogonally (paradoxically) contradictory idea, that is, the idea of "a single tree of life". "Natural" does in this sense not mean unambiguous, but rather the opposite.

Inga kommentarer:

Skicka en kommentar