samedi 8 octobre 2022

Intensional & stipulative definitions of male/female apply to all anisogamous species

Resolved: The unscientific definitions of Heying, Hilton, & Wright are flatly contradicted by and inconsistent with the standard biological definitions of Parker, Lehtonen, Griffiths, Google/OD, and many other sources. The former should therefore be deprecated, and be replaced in, to start with, all biological and sociological journals and applications with the latter.

The definitions of Hilton and Company essentially define each sex as a polythetic category; each sex becomes a discrete spectrum of three states or conditions:



The definitions of Parker, Lehtonen, and Company essentially define each sex as a monothetic category with single necessary & sufficient conditions for category membership -- i.e., functional gonads of two and only two types. Those organisms with neither are therefore sexless:



https://web.archive.org/web/20190326...definition/sex
https://web.archive.org/web/20181020...inition/female
https://web.archive.org/web/20190608...efinition/male
https://academic.oup.com/molehr/arti...2/1161/1062990
https://link.springer.com/referencew...16999-6_3063-1

Fairly clear description of the difference between monothetic and polythetic categories:



Some background on intensional, and stipulative definitions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Extens...al_definitions
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stipulative_definition


via International Skeptics Forum https://ift.tt/ifFm5JP

Aucun commentaire:

Enregistrer un commentaire