The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Species as family resemblance concepts: The (dis‐)solution of the species problem?
Abstract
The so‐called “species problem” has plagued evolutionary biology since before Darwin's publication of the aptly titled Origin of Species. Many biologists think the problem is just a matter of semantics; others complain that it will not be solved until we have more empirical data. Yet, we don't seem to be able to escape discussing it and teaching seminars about it. In this paper, I briefly examine the main themes of the biological and philosophical literatures on the species problem, focusing on identifying common threads as well as relevant differences. I then argue two fundamental points. First, the species problem is not primarily an empirical one, but it is rather fraught with philosophical questions that require—but cannot be settled by—empirical evidence. Second, the (dis‐)solution lies in explicitly adopting Wittgenstein's idea of “family resemblance” or cluster concepts, and to consider species as an example of such concepts. This solution has several attractive features, including bringing together apparently diverging themes of discussion among biologists and philosophers. The current proposal is conceptually independent (though not incompatible) with the pluralist approach to the species problem advocated by Mishler, Donoghue, Kitcher and Dupré, which implies that distinct aspects of the species question need to be emphasized depending on the goals of the researcher. From the biological literature, the concept of species that most closely matches the philosophical discussion presented here is Templeton's cohesion idea. BioEssays 25:596–602, 2003. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
DENNETT, D. C. (1995) · The Sciences · doi:10.1002/j.2326-1951.1995.tb03633.x · Cited by 1,975
Solms, M. (1997) · Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association · doi:10.1177/00030651970450031201 · Cited by 252
Cited by
Evolution, the Extended Synthesis
(2010) · The MIT Press eBooks · doi:10.7551/mitpress/9780262513678.001.0001 · Cited by 964
On the failure of modern species concepts
HEY, J. (2006) · Trends in Ecology & Evolution · doi:10.1016/j.tree.2006.05.011 · Cited by 357
Neanderthals Revisited: New Approaches and Perspectives
(2006) · Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology · doi:10.1007/978-1-4020-5121-0 · Cited by 257
Metadata
- Authors
- Pigliucci, M.
- Venue
- BioEssays
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2003-05-19
- Volume
- 25
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 596-602
- ISSN
- 0265-9247 (ISSN-L)
- 1521-1878
- OpenAlex
- W2156778659
- Cited by
- 181
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 8.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Species as family resemblance concepts: The (dis‐)solution of the species problem? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1002/bies.10284
- The paper
- Pigliucci, M. (2003). Species as family resemblance concepts: The (dis‐)solution of the species problem? BioEssays. https://doi.org/10.1002/bies.10284
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.