3. There is a strong undercurrent of personal preference for history over mechanism that, to me, makes the rejection of BSC+ come across more as preference than logical outcome. 4. The chair metaphor to contrast with species may be less distinct than intended! - ThreadSky

asherdcutter.bsky.social • 70 days ago

3. There is a strong undercurrent of personal preference for history over mechanism that, to me, makes the rejection of BSC+ come across more as preference than logical outcome.
4. The chair metaphor to contrast with species may be less distinct than intended!

Comments

waynemaddison.bsky.social•70 days ago

About 3, our concept is precisely history plus mechanism. It's the BSC that's rejected half. I can imagine a BSCer might think that we're preferring history just because we insist on it. But, we're also insisting on mechanism.

waynemaddison.bsky.social•70 days ago

If we seek a history/mechanism balance, why do we spend so much time talking about history? Of 4 constituencies, BSCers, coalesc.-phylogeog., phylogeneticists, & taxonomists we expected strong resistance only from the BSCers, and so focused our strongest arguments there.

waynemaddison.bsky.social•70 days ago

About 4, the chair is simply an object. With that metaphor we were in philosophy mode, not biology mode.

asherdcutter.bsky.social•70 days ago

E.g., a chair was once, say, part of an oak tree whose carbon molecules once were atmospheric, a chair that will eventually break and, say, get repaired (a "chair of Theseus" situation) or, say, get burned to become ash and atmospheric molecules without "sharply defined multidimensional boundaries".

waynemaddison.bsky.social•70 days ago

Yup, things don't last.

asherdcutter.bsky.social•70 days ago

5. I feel comfortable shifting among concepts (and timescales) depending on the question and appropriate data at hand, so feel no compulsion for a grand unified definition.
6. I think timescales could be more explicitly defined than you suggest.

waynemaddison.bsky.social•70 days ago

About 5, good, but please realize we are not claiming a universal definition. It's that for *most purposes of most biologists* — and this may not include microevolutionary biologists — a retrospective view is critical. About 6, yes, how deep to look back is not fully discussed in the paper.

asherdcutter.bsky.social•70 days ago

Separation-of-timescales model logic can be used as a guide (I think of Wakeley). E.g., pedigree timescale, coalescent timescale, deme-coalescent timescale, deeper than coalescent timescale.

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply