Javascript must be enabled to continue!
Phylogenetic Signal in Characters from Aristotle’s History of Animals
View through CrossRef
The great Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BCE) is almost unanimously acclaimed as the founder of zoology. There is a consensus that he was interested in attributes of animals, but whether or not he tried to develop a zoological taxonomy remains controversial. Fürst von Lieven and Humar compiled a data matrix and showed, through a parsimony analysis published in 2008, that these data produced a hierarchy that matched several taxa recognized by Aristotle. However, their analysis leaves some questions unanswered because random data can sometimes yield fairly resolved trees. In this study, we update the scores of many cells and add four new characters to the data matrix (147 taxa scored for 161 characters) and quote passages from Aristotle’s Historia animalium to justify these changes. We confirm the presence of a phylogenetic signal in these data through a test using skewness in length distribution of a million random trees, which shows that many of the characters discussed by Aristotle were systematically relevant. Our parsimony analyses on the updated matrix recover far more trees than reported by Fürst von Lieven and Humar, but their consensus includes many taxa that Aristotle recognized and apparently named for the first time, such as selachē (selachians) and dithyra (Bivalvia). This study suggests that even though taxonomy was clearly not Aristotle’s chief interest in Historia animalium, it was probably among his secondary interests. These results may pave the way for further taxonomic studies in Aristotle’s zoological writings in general. Despite being almost peripheral to Aristotle’s writings, his taxonomic contributions are clearly major achievements.
Title: Phylogenetic Signal in Characters from Aristotle’s History of Animals
Description:
The great Greek philosopher Aristotle (384–322 BCE) is almost unanimously acclaimed as the founder of zoology.
There is a consensus that he was interested in attributes of animals, but whether or not he tried to develop a zoological taxonomy remains controversial.
Fürst von Lieven and Humar compiled a data matrix and showed, through a parsimony analysis published in 2008, that these data produced a hierarchy that matched several taxa recognized by Aristotle.
However, their analysis leaves some questions unanswered because random data can sometimes yield fairly resolved trees.
In this study, we update the scores of many cells and add four new characters to the data matrix (147 taxa scored for 161 characters) and quote passages from Aristotle’s Historia animalium to justify these changes.
We confirm the presence of a phylogenetic signal in these data through a test using skewness in length distribution of a million random trees, which shows that many of the characters discussed by Aristotle were systematically relevant.
Our parsimony analyses on the updated matrix recover far more trees than reported by Fürst von Lieven and Humar, but their consensus includes many taxa that Aristotle recognized and apparently named for the first time, such as selachē (selachians) and dithyra (Bivalvia).
This study suggests that even though taxonomy was clearly not Aristotle’s chief interest in Historia animalium, it was probably among his secondary interests.
These results may pave the way for further taxonomic studies in Aristotle’s zoological writings in general.
Despite being almost peripheral to Aristotle’s writings, his taxonomic contributions are clearly major achievements.
Related Results
Phylogenetic signal in characters from Aristotle’s History of Animals
Phylogenetic signal in characters from Aristotle’s History of Animals
The influential Greek philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BCE) is almost unanimously acclaimed as the founder of zoology. There is a consensus that he was interested in attributes of an...
Colloquium 4: Aristotle’s Discovery of First Philosophy
Colloquium 4: Aristotle’s Discovery of First Philosophy
Abstract
Among the three kinds of theoretical knowledge, Aristotle distinguishes between physics and metaphysics—what he calls Second and First Philosophy. Aristotle’s physics stud...
Plato and Aristotle in Agreement?
Plato and Aristotle in Agreement?
AbstractThis book breaks new ground in the study of later ancient philosophy by examining the interplay of the two main schools of thought, Platonism and Aristotelianism, from the ...
Phylogenetic overdispersion of plant species in southern Brazilian savannas
Phylogenetic overdispersion of plant species in southern Brazilian savannas
Ecological communities are the result of not only present ecological processes, such as competition among species and environmental filtering, but also past and continuing evolutio...
PaNDA: Efficient Optimization of Phylogenetic Diversity in Networks
PaNDA: Efficient Optimization of Phylogenetic Diversity in Networks
Abstract
Phylogenetic diversity plays an important role in biodiversity, conservation, and evolutionary studies by measuring the diversity of a s...
Bilgi ve Aristoteles - Aristoteles Felsefesinde Bilginin Temellendirilmesi
Bilgi ve Aristoteles - Aristoteles Felsefesinde Bilginin Temellendirilmesi
Knowledge and Aristotle The Grounding of Knowledge in Aristotle’s Philosophy-rnKnowledge is the most important form of human relationship with being. It has been one of the most im...
Ictogenesis
Ictogenesis
*Michel Le Van Quyen, †Pascale Quilichini, †Yehezkel Ben‐Ari, †Christophe Bernard, and †Henri Gozlan ( *Neurodynamics Group, LENA‐CNRS UPR640, Hôpital de la Salpêtrière, Paris , an...
Plato and Aristotle in the Academy
Plato and Aristotle in the Academy
This chapter considers Aristotle’s criticisms of Plato. Among these are (1) Aristotle raises doubts about and rejects aspects of Plato’s theory of Forms, (2) Aristotle dismisses Pl...

