Receiving an Ancestor in the Phylogenetic Tree: Neanderthal Man, Homo erectus and Homo floresiensis: L’histoire se Répète

Journal of the History of Biology 42 (2):361-379 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

A comparison is made between the scientific receptions of three proposed new members of the hominin phylogenetic tree: the first finds of Neanderthal Man, those of Homo erectus, and those of Homo floresiensis. In each case, the leading scientists of the moment of discovery heavily debated the finds and neglected the meaning of those finds. At least it took/will take one generation before the meaning of those finds were/will be accepted

Categories

Keywords

Reprint years

DOI

10.1007/s10739-008-9165-9

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,139

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

My notes

Similar books and articles

Receiving an Ancestor in the Phylogenetic Tree: Neanderthal Man, Homo erectus and Homo floresiensis: L’histoire se Répète.John de Vos - 2009 - Journal of the History of Biology 42 (2):361 - 379.
Taxonomy and philosophy of names.Mikael Härlin & Per Sundberg - 1998 - Biology and Philosophy 13 (2):233-244.
Testing the Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution.Patrick Forber - unknown
Constraining prior probabilities of phylogenetic trees.Bengt Autzen - 2011 - Biology and Philosophy 26 (4):567-581.
Of mites and millipedes: Recent progress in resolving the base of the arthropod tree.Jason Caravas & Markus Friedrich - 2010 - Bioessays 32 (6):488-495.
Prelinguistic evolution in hominin mothers and babies: For cryin' out loud!Dean Falk - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (4):461-462.
Species concepts should not conflict with evolutionary history, but often do.Joel D. Velasco - 2008 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 39 (4):407-414.
Gene sharing and genome evolution: networks in trees and trees in networks.Robert G. Beiko - 2010 - Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):659-673.
The tree of life: introduction to an evolutionary debate. [REVIEW]Maureen A. O’Malley, William Martin & John Dupré - 2010 - Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):441-453.
Definition 1.1. 1. A tree is a subset T of< such that for all∈ T, if∈< and⊆, then∈ T. 2. If T is a tree and S⊆ T is also a tree, we say that S is a subtree of T. 3. A tree T is bounded if there exists h:→ such that for all∈ T. [REVIEW]Joseph R. Mileti - 2005 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 11 (3).
Evolutionary neuroscience: Limitations and prospects.Georg F. Striedter - 2006 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 29 (1):25-31.
Testing for treeness: lateral gene transfer, phylogenetic inference, and model selection.Joel D. Velasco & Elliott Sober - 2010 - Biology and Philosophy 25 (4):675-687.
Parcellation: An explanation of the arrangement of apples and oranges on a severely pruned phylogenetic tree?Mark R. Braford - 1984 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 7 (3):332-333.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-11-22

Downloads
20 (#703,484)

6 months
5 (#441,012)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Add more references