Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Standard

Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies. / Sterner, Beckett; Witteveen, Joeri; Franz, Nico.

In: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, Vol. 42, No. 8, 2020, p. 1-25.

Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review

Harvard

Sterner, B, Witteveen, J & Franz, N 2020, 'Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies', History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, vol. 42, no. 8, pp. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-020-0300-z

APA

Sterner, B., Witteveen, J., & Franz, N. (2020). Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences, 42(8), 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-020-0300-z

Vancouver

Sterner B, Witteveen J, Franz N. Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. 2020;42(8):1-25. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40656-020-0300-z

Author

Sterner, Beckett ; Witteveen, Joeri ; Franz, Nico. / Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies. In: History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences. 2020 ; Vol. 42, No. 8. pp. 1-25.

Bibtex

@article{5d4e734bbf724fd88b5824e7d560847d,
title = "Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies",
abstract = "The collection and classification of data into meaningful categories is a key step in the process of knowledge making. In the life sciences, the design of data discovery and integration tools has relied on the premise that a formal classificatory system for expressing a body of data should be grounded in consensus definitions for classifications. On this approach, exemplified by the realist program of the Open Biomedical Ontologies Foundry, progress is maximized by grounding the representation and aggregation of data on settled knowledge. We argue that historical practices in systematic biology provide an important and overlooked alternative approach to classifying and disseminating data, based on a principle of coordinative rather than definitional consensus. Systematists have developed a robust system for referring to taxonomic entities that can deliver high quality data discovery and integration without invoking consensus about reality or “settled” science.",
author = "Beckett Sterner and Joeri Witteveen and Nico Franz",
year = "2020",
doi = "10.1007/s40656-020-0300-z",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "1--25",
journal = "History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences",
issn = "0391-9714",
publisher = "Springer",
number = "8",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Coordinating dissent as an alternative to consensus classification: insights from systematics for bio-ontologies

AU - Sterner, Beckett

AU - Witteveen, Joeri

AU - Franz, Nico

PY - 2020

Y1 - 2020

N2 - The collection and classification of data into meaningful categories is a key step in the process of knowledge making. In the life sciences, the design of data discovery and integration tools has relied on the premise that a formal classificatory system for expressing a body of data should be grounded in consensus definitions for classifications. On this approach, exemplified by the realist program of the Open Biomedical Ontologies Foundry, progress is maximized by grounding the representation and aggregation of data on settled knowledge. We argue that historical practices in systematic biology provide an important and overlooked alternative approach to classifying and disseminating data, based on a principle of coordinative rather than definitional consensus. Systematists have developed a robust system for referring to taxonomic entities that can deliver high quality data discovery and integration without invoking consensus about reality or “settled” science.

AB - The collection and classification of data into meaningful categories is a key step in the process of knowledge making. In the life sciences, the design of data discovery and integration tools has relied on the premise that a formal classificatory system for expressing a body of data should be grounded in consensus definitions for classifications. On this approach, exemplified by the realist program of the Open Biomedical Ontologies Foundry, progress is maximized by grounding the representation and aggregation of data on settled knowledge. We argue that historical practices in systematic biology provide an important and overlooked alternative approach to classifying and disseminating data, based on a principle of coordinative rather than definitional consensus. Systematists have developed a robust system for referring to taxonomic entities that can deliver high quality data discovery and integration without invoking consensus about reality or “settled” science.

U2 - 10.1007/s40656-020-0300-z

DO - 10.1007/s40656-020-0300-z

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 32030540

VL - 42

SP - 1

EP - 25

JO - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences

JF - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences

SN - 0391-9714

IS - 8

ER -

ID: 235584639