History and reality of the genus ‘Homo’: What is it and why do we think so?

IF 0.4 Q3 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
I. Tattersall
{"title":"History and reality of the genus ‘Homo’: What is it and why do we think so?","authors":"I. Tattersall","doi":"10.7203/METODE.8.9111","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Paleoanthropologists who worry about how nature is organized into species, and about what we should call them, are very often accused by their peers of «just arguing about names». This implies that basic taxonomy is a boring clerical operation that should be dispensed with as quickly as possible or even ignored, so that we can get to the really interesting questions about human evolution. Yet the reality is that we shall never understand the events of the intricate human evolutionary play if we cannot accurately identify the actors who participated in that drama. This article looks briefly at how our current supremely woolly concept of the genus Homo has come about, as background for urging a more rational approach to defining it.","PeriodicalId":41648,"journal":{"name":"Metode Science Studies Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":"78-89"},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2017-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Metode Science Studies Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7203/METODE.8.9111","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

Paleoanthropologists who worry about how nature is organized into species, and about what we should call them, are very often accused by their peers of «just arguing about names». This implies that basic taxonomy is a boring clerical operation that should be dispensed with as quickly as possible or even ignored, so that we can get to the really interesting questions about human evolution. Yet the reality is that we shall never understand the events of the intricate human evolutionary play if we cannot accurately identify the actors who participated in that drama. This article looks briefly at how our current supremely woolly concept of the genus Homo has come about, as background for urging a more rational approach to defining it.
“人属”的历史和现实:它是什么,为什么我们这样认为?
古人类学家担心自然是如何被组织成物种的,以及我们应该怎么称呼它们,他们经常被同行指责为“只是在争论名字”。这意味着,基本的分类学是一种无聊的文书操作,应该尽快取消甚至忽略,这样我们才能了解关于人类进化的真正有趣的问题。然而,现实是,如果我们不能准确地确定参与这部复杂的人类进化剧的演员,我们将永远无法理解这部剧中发生的事件。这篇文章简要介绍了我们目前对人属的极度模糊的概念是如何产生的,作为敦促用更理性的方法来定义它的背景。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Metode Science Studies Journal
Metode Science Studies Journal HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE-
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
18
审稿时长
19 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信