The minimal role of the higher categories in biology

Biology and Philosophy 38 (1):1-9 (2022)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Talk of higher categories (ranks) like Genus and Family is ubiquitous in biology. Yet there is widespread skepticism about these categories. We can locate the source of this skepticism in the lack of “robust concepts” for these categories, robust theories of what it is to be in a certain category. A common defense of category talk is that its virtues are “just pragmatic and not theoretic”. But this strains credulity. We should suppose rather that talk of the higher categories does theoretical work. What work? The paper proposes a “minimal concept” for a category, according to which the category is at least explanatory in marking out, in a rough and ready way, a level in the hierarchy of explanatory taxa. The skepticism is exaggerated.

Other Versions

No versions found

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 101,518

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2022-12-29

Downloads
28 (#810,662)

6 months
9 (#519,282)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

From a Logical Point of View.Willard Van Orman Quine - 1953 - Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Evolution, population thinking, and essentialism.Elliott Sober - 1980 - Philosophy of Science 47 (3):350-383.
Species.Philip Kitcher - 1984 - Philosophy of Science 51 (2):308-333.
Natural kinds and biological taxa.John Dupré - 1981 - Philosophical Review 90 (1):66-90.
Natural Kinds and Biological Taxa.John Dupré - 1981 - The Philosophical Review 90 (1):66-90.

View all 20 references / Add more references