Genealogical Systematics

Bibliographic Data

ID13081440
AuthorsArnold G Kluge (Ann Arbor Center for Independent Living, corresponding author)
Year2023
Volume7
Issue1
Pages11-11
Publication date2023-02-20
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessYes
TypeARTICLE
VenueGenealogy (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 2313-5778 • E-ISSN: 2313-5778
PublisherMDPI AG (PUBLISHER • IT)
DOI10.3390/genealogy7010011
OpenAlexW4321371553
LanguageEN
References cited24

Genealogical research usually begins with the discovery of affinity among individual humans. Such kinship is induced by direct observation, as well as by hearsay (indirect observation) that can be independently confirmed. Those who want to continue investigating a case history after the observational mode of fact-finding is no longer sustainable have no other choice than to switch to the discovery of consanguineous relationships. This involves a paradigm shift, where investigation dramatically changes from observation to inference, from inductive to deductive reasoning. Individuation is important in characterizing the personhood of an individual, but those same facts are of little empirical value in establishing the unification of a family. In addition, genealogists rely on marriage as an observable source of evidence for unification. However, this extrapolation is not completely convincing because marriage does not take into account the uncertainty of paternity. Individual parents usually descend from different parts of family history, which suggests genealogists should evaluate cultural factors responsible for non-random mating in attempting to infer consanguinity. For example, there is the incest taboo, a cultural convention which addresses the abnormal genetic consequences of inbreeding. Other non-random mating factors of a more general nature may also be identified in the unification of genetically different individuals. Here, for example, causality is expected in cultural principles that are of a cohesive and integrative nature. Those kinds of evidence may determine an unmarried pair’s earliest engagement and may also be responsible for the origin and maintenance of the marriage relationship, even throughout post-reproductive life. Lastly, current genealogical research is severely infected with confirmation bias, and from which it must be protected if it is to achieve the status of a scientific discipline. Critical rationalism provides a solution to that kind of problem. It is with remediation in mind, as it applies to all of the aforementioned issues, that genealogical systematics is characterized

Agency (philosophy · Epistemology · Genealogy · Kinship · Personhood · Sociology · Anthropology · History · Plant Taxonomy and Phylogenetics · Psychology · Social Psychology

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access