TY - JOUR

T1 - An oak is an oak, or not?

T2 - Understanding and dealing with confusion and disagreement in biological classification

AU - Cuypers, Vincent

AU - Reydon, Thomas A.C.

N1 - Funding Information: We would like to thank Stijn Conix (UCLouvain), Andreas De Block (KU Leuven), Tom Artois (Hasselt University), Charles Pence (UCLouvain), Max Bautista Perpinyà (UCLouvain), the audience of the Society for Philosophy of Science in Practice biennial meeting in Ghent, Belgium (July 2022), the audience of the 2022 EASPLS summer school in Bordeaux, France (September 2022), and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments on this work. Funding Information: This work was supported by the Research Foundation – Flanders (Belgium) [Grant Number G0D5720N]. The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

PY - 2023/10

Y1 - 2023/10

N2 - Human interaction with the living world, in science and beyond, always involves classification. While it has been a long-standing scientific goal to produce a single all-purpose taxonomy of life to cater for this need, classificatory practice is often subject to confusion and disagreement, and many philosophers have advocated forms of classificatory pluralism. This entails that multiple classifications should be allowed to coexist, and that whichever classification is best, is context-dependent. In this paper, we discuss some practical consequences of classificatory pluralism, in particular with regard to how one is supposed to find the best classification for a given context. We do so by means of a case study concerning oaks, in particular the pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) and the sessile oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl.), two important putative species that present several classificatory challenges; and by applying one recent philosophical framework conceptualizing classification, the so-called Grounded Functionality Account (GFA) of (natural) kinds. We show how the GFA elucidates several issues related to oak classification and gives directions to optimize classificatory practices, and discuss some implications for scientific taxonomy.

AB - Human interaction with the living world, in science and beyond, always involves classification. While it has been a long-standing scientific goal to produce a single all-purpose taxonomy of life to cater for this need, classificatory practice is often subject to confusion and disagreement, and many philosophers have advocated forms of classificatory pluralism. This entails that multiple classifications should be allowed to coexist, and that whichever classification is best, is context-dependent. In this paper, we discuss some practical consequences of classificatory pluralism, in particular with regard to how one is supposed to find the best classification for a given context. We do so by means of a case study concerning oaks, in particular the pedunculate oak (Quercus robur L.) and the sessile oak (Quercus petraea (Matt.) Liebl.), two important putative species that present several classificatory challenges; and by applying one recent philosophical framework conceptualizing classification, the so-called Grounded Functionality Account (GFA) of (natural) kinds. We show how the GFA elucidates several issues related to oak classification and gives directions to optimize classificatory practices, and discuss some implications for scientific taxonomy.

KW - Classification

KW - Oaks

KW - Pluralism

KW - Policymaking

KW - Taxonomy

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85171997214&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s10539-023-09925-x

DO - 10.1007/s10539-023-09925-x

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85171997214

VL - 38

JO - Biology and Philosophy

JF - Biology and Philosophy

SN - 0169-3867

IS - 5

M1 - 39

ER -