On the higher subdivisions in the classification of mammals

Clicks: 1
ID: 301654
1863
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #5,912 of 8,486 articles by views in american journal of science

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 8,486 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
THE precise position of Man in the system of Mammals has long been, and still remains, a subject of discussion.There are those who regard him as too remote from all other species of the class to be subject to ordinary principles of classification.But zoologists, generally, place him either in an independent order, (or subclas.~,if the highest divisions be subclasses,) or else at the head of the order containing the Quadrumana.Science, in searching out the system in nature, leaves psychical or intellectual qualities out of view; and this is right.It is also safe: for these immaterial characteristics have, in all cuses, a material or structural expression; and when this expression is apprehended, and its true importance full.yadmitted, classification will not fail of its duty in recognizing the distinctioTls they indicate.ClIvier, in distinguishing Man as of the order Bimana, and the Monkeys of the order Quadrumana, did not bring out to view any profound difference between the groups.The relations of the two are so close, that Man, on this ground alone, would be far from certain of his separate place.No reason can be derived from the study of other departments of the Mammals, or of the animal kingdom, for conSIdering the having of two hands a mark of superior rank to the having of four.Prof. Owen, in his recent classification of Mammals,l makes the characteristics of the brain the basis of the several grand divisions.But, as he admits, the distinctions fail in many cases of corresponding to the groups laid down: and although the brain of Man (his group Archencephala) differs in some striking points from that of the Qlladrumana, yet no study of the brain alone would suggest the real distinction between the groups, or prove that Man was not coordinal with the Monkeys.In fact, the nervous system is a very unsafe basis of classification below the highest grade of subdivisions-~hat into subkingdoms.The same subkingdom may contain species with, and without, a distinct nervous system, and a class or order may present very wide diversities as to its form and development,-for the reason, that the system or plan of structure in species is far more authoritative In classification than the condition of the nervous system.The fitness of the parts of the body of Man for intellectual uses and his erect pOSItion have been considered zoological characteristics of eminent importance, separating him from other M.ammals.But even these qualities, although admitted to be of
Reference Key
openalex_W2322896606 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors J. D. Dana
Journal american journal of science
Year 1863
DOI
10.2475/ajs.s2-35.103.65
URL
https://doi.org/10.2475/ajs.s2-35.103.65
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.