The normative structure of mathematization in systematic biology

Beckett Sterner, Scott Lidgard

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

We argue that the mathematization of science should be understood as a normative activity of advocating for a particular methodology with its own criteria for evaluating good research. As a case study, we examine the mathematization of taxonomic classification in systematic biology. We show how mathematization is a normative activity by contrasting its distinctive features in numerical taxonomy in the 1960s with an earlier reform advocated by Ernst Mayr starting in the 1940s. Both Mayr and the numerical taxonomists sought to formalize the work of classification, but Mayr introduced a qualitative formalism based on human judgment for determining the taxonomic rank of populations, while the numerical taxonomists introduced a quantitative formalism based on automated procedures for computing classifications. The key contrast between Mayr and the numerical taxonomists is how they conceptualized the temporal structure of the workflow of classification, specifically where they allowed meta-level discourse about difficulties in producing the classification.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)44-54
Number of pages11
JournalStudies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences
Volume46
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - 2014
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Workflow
Mathematization
Research
Population
Formalism
Taxonomy
1960s
Ernst Mayr
Discourse
1940s
Methodology
Distinctive Features

Keywords

  • Classification
  • Logical positivism
  • Methodology
  • New systematics
  • Numerical taxonomy
  • Species

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)
  • History
  • History and Philosophy of Science

Cite this

@article{586cdc9b64b5479382866feb1a206dec,
title = "The normative structure of mathematization in systematic biology",
abstract = "We argue that the mathematization of science should be understood as a normative activity of advocating for a particular methodology with its own criteria for evaluating good research. As a case study, we examine the mathematization of taxonomic classification in systematic biology. We show how mathematization is a normative activity by contrasting its distinctive features in numerical taxonomy in the 1960s with an earlier reform advocated by Ernst Mayr starting in the 1940s. Both Mayr and the numerical taxonomists sought to formalize the work of classification, but Mayr introduced a qualitative formalism based on human judgment for determining the taxonomic rank of populations, while the numerical taxonomists introduced a quantitative formalism based on automated procedures for computing classifications. The key contrast between Mayr and the numerical taxonomists is how they conceptualized the temporal structure of the workflow of classification, specifically where they allowed meta-level discourse about difficulties in producing the classification.",
keywords = "Classification, Logical positivism, Methodology, New systematics, Numerical taxonomy, Species",
author = "Beckett Sterner and Scott Lidgard",
year = "2014",
doi = "10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.03.001",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "44--54",
journal = "Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences",
issn = "1369-8486",
publisher = "Elsevier Limited",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The normative structure of mathematization in systematic biology

AU - Sterner, Beckett

AU - Lidgard, Scott

PY - 2014

Y1 - 2014

N2 - We argue that the mathematization of science should be understood as a normative activity of advocating for a particular methodology with its own criteria for evaluating good research. As a case study, we examine the mathematization of taxonomic classification in systematic biology. We show how mathematization is a normative activity by contrasting its distinctive features in numerical taxonomy in the 1960s with an earlier reform advocated by Ernst Mayr starting in the 1940s. Both Mayr and the numerical taxonomists sought to formalize the work of classification, but Mayr introduced a qualitative formalism based on human judgment for determining the taxonomic rank of populations, while the numerical taxonomists introduced a quantitative formalism based on automated procedures for computing classifications. The key contrast between Mayr and the numerical taxonomists is how they conceptualized the temporal structure of the workflow of classification, specifically where they allowed meta-level discourse about difficulties in producing the classification.

AB - We argue that the mathematization of science should be understood as a normative activity of advocating for a particular methodology with its own criteria for evaluating good research. As a case study, we examine the mathematization of taxonomic classification in systematic biology. We show how mathematization is a normative activity by contrasting its distinctive features in numerical taxonomy in the 1960s with an earlier reform advocated by Ernst Mayr starting in the 1940s. Both Mayr and the numerical taxonomists sought to formalize the work of classification, but Mayr introduced a qualitative formalism based on human judgment for determining the taxonomic rank of populations, while the numerical taxonomists introduced a quantitative formalism based on automated procedures for computing classifications. The key contrast between Mayr and the numerical taxonomists is how they conceptualized the temporal structure of the workflow of classification, specifically where they allowed meta-level discourse about difficulties in producing the classification.

KW - Classification

KW - Logical positivism

KW - Methodology

KW - New systematics

KW - Numerical taxonomy

KW - Species

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84897942194&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84897942194&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.03.001

DO - 10.1016/j.shpsc.2014.03.001

M3 - Article

C2 - 24717645

AN - SCOPUS:84897942194

VL - 46

SP - 44

EP - 54

JO - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences

JF - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C :Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences

SN - 1369-8486

IS - 1

ER -