Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box arguments

Following the discussion initiated by the opinion article by Guedes et al. (2023) “Eponyms have no place in 21st-century biological nomenclature” published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, in which the authors demanded to ban and cancel all eponyms (scientific names and epithets of taxa, which are...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Mosyakin S.L.
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: M.G.Kholodny Institute of Botany 2023-10-01
Series:Ukrainian Botanical Journal
Subjects:
Online Access:https://ukrbotj.co.ua/archive/80/5/381
_version_ 1797321553909645312
author Mosyakin S.L.
author_facet Mosyakin S.L.
author_sort Mosyakin S.L.
collection DOAJ
description Following the discussion initiated by the opinion article by Guedes et al. (2023) “Eponyms have no place in 21st-century biological nomenclature” published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, in which the authors demanded to ban and cancel all eponyms (scientific names and epithets of taxa, which are derived from names of persons) in biological nomenclature, and, in particular, responding to comments by Thiele (2023) about the supposedly fallacious nature of the Slippery Slope argument (which I discussed in my earlier opinion articles), I provide here additional arguments in favor of the continued use of eponyms in particular and against politically (or so-called “ethically”) motivated censorship in biological nomenclature in general. I conclude that allowing “culture wars” in biological nomenclature and possible cancellation of scientific names that are considered (or may be considered) by some people as “objectionable, offensive, or inappropriate” will result in the nomenclatural chaos caused by a large-scale disruption of well-working nomenclatural codes and naming conventions. Biological nomenclature is vitally important not only to the science of biological taxonomy but also to all other sciences and fields of human activities dealing with the living world. That nomenclature, time-proven and, indeed, sometimes loaded with complicated but also fascinating and instructive history, should not be disrupted because of ever-changing politically motivated claims and Protean vogues. It should not become a new battlefield for culture wars.
first_indexed 2024-03-08T05:00:15Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4b4c1dae25ab425a9ce311bca3372ebb
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 0372-4123
2415-8860
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-08T05:00:15Z
publishDate 2023-10-01
publisher M.G.Kholodny Institute of Botany
record_format Article
series Ukrainian Botanical Journal
spelling doaj.art-4b4c1dae25ab425a9ce311bca3372ebb2024-02-07T13:02:28ZengM.G.Kholodny Institute of BotanyUkrainian Botanical Journal0372-41232415-88602023-10-0180538138510.15407/ukrbotj80.05.381Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box argumentsMosyakin S.L.0https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3570-3190M.G. Kholodny Institute of Botany, National Academy of Sciences of UkraineFollowing the discussion initiated by the opinion article by Guedes et al. (2023) “Eponyms have no place in 21st-century biological nomenclature” published in Nature Ecology & Evolution, in which the authors demanded to ban and cancel all eponyms (scientific names and epithets of taxa, which are derived from names of persons) in biological nomenclature, and, in particular, responding to comments by Thiele (2023) about the supposedly fallacious nature of the Slippery Slope argument (which I discussed in my earlier opinion articles), I provide here additional arguments in favor of the continued use of eponyms in particular and against politically (or so-called “ethically”) motivated censorship in biological nomenclature in general. I conclude that allowing “culture wars” in biological nomenclature and possible cancellation of scientific names that are considered (or may be considered) by some people as “objectionable, offensive, or inappropriate” will result in the nomenclatural chaos caused by a large-scale disruption of well-working nomenclatural codes and naming conventions. Biological nomenclature is vitally important not only to the science of biological taxonomy but also to all other sciences and fields of human activities dealing with the living world. That nomenclature, time-proven and, indeed, sometimes loaded with complicated but also fascinating and instructive history, should not be disrupted because of ever-changing politically motivated claims and Protean vogues. It should not become a new battlefield for culture wars.https://ukrbotj.co.ua/archive/80/5/381biological nomenclaturebotanical nomenclatureculture warseponymspandora’s box argumentslippery slope argumenttaxonomy
spellingShingle Mosyakin S.L.
Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box arguments
Ukrainian Botanical Journal
biological nomenclature
botanical nomenclature
culture wars
eponyms
pandora’s box argument
slippery slope argument
taxonomy
title Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box arguments
title_full Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box arguments
title_fullStr Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box arguments
title_full_unstemmed Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box arguments
title_short Eponyms in biological nomenclature and the Slippery Slope and Pandora’s Box arguments
title_sort eponyms in biological nomenclature and the slippery slope and pandora s box arguments
topic biological nomenclature
botanical nomenclature
culture wars
eponyms
pandora’s box argument
slippery slope argument
taxonomy
url https://ukrbotj.co.ua/archive/80/5/381
work_keys_str_mv AT mosyakinsl eponymsinbiologicalnomenclatureandtheslipperyslopeandpandorasboxarguments