Skip to main content
Log in

Cladistics, sociology and success: A comment on Donoghue's critique of David Hull

  • Discussion
  • Published:
Biology and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  • Donoghue, M.J.: 1990, ‘Sociology, Selection and Success: A Critique of David Hull's Analysis of Science and Systematics’,Biology and Philosophy 5, 459–472.

    Google Scholar 

  • Farris, J.S. and N.I. Platnick: 1989, ‘Lord of the Flies: The Systematist as Study Animal’,Cladistics 5, 295–310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hull, D.L.: 1988,Science as a Process, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nelson, G.: 1989, ‘Cladistics and Evolutionary Models’,Cladistics 5, 275–289.

    Google Scholar 

  • Panchen, A.L.: 1992,Classification, Evolution, and the Nature of Biology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge and New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, C.: 1988, ‘The Impact of Evolutionary Theories on Systematics’, in D.L. Hawksworth (ed.),Prospects in Systematics, Systematics Association Special Vol. 36, Clarendon Press, Oxford, pp. 59–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romer, A.S.: 1966,Vertebrate Paleontology, Third Edition, University of Chicago Press, Chicago.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schoch, R.M.: 1986,Phylogeny Reconstruction in Paleontology, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, G.G.: 1961,Principles of Animal Taxonomy, Columbia University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J.M.: 1988,Robespierre, Basil Blackwell, Oxford and New York.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nelson, G., Patterson, C. Cladistics, sociology and success: A comment on Donoghue's critique of David Hull. Biol Philos 8, 441–443 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00857689

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00857689

Navigation