The Virtual Mode: a different look at species

Species within the virtual mode—a reply to Monsch

“…We wish to further the dialogue on examining the nature of species, a dialogue begun by us (Maze & al., 2005a) and continued by Monsch (2005), in which our conclusions are rejected. We debate his reasons and shall clarify several points referred to by Monsch (2005).…”

Species are actual, not virtual

“…An alternative view of species, challenging currently held ideas on the issue, has been presented in a recent Points of View paper in this journal (Maze & al., 2005a). I will argue here that this new look at species is not needed, moreover, that it is fundamentally flawed.…”

“…This is not the first presentation of this alternative view: it appeared for the first time in the journal Biosystems (Maze & al., 2003). I suppose that the authors repeated their ideas in a condensed form in Taxon (Maze & al., 2005a) to inform systematic biologists. These form only part of the audience of the journal where the virtual code (I will explain below why I call this a virtual code and not a mode, as in the Maze & al., 2005a paper) was discussed first.…”

“…- Maze & al. (2003Maze & al. ( , 2005a) employ amongst others the following arguments to argue that species are "virtual": those that I mention below are, according to me, the most important to their concept.…”

“…Besides that, to explain the processes of continuity in aggregates of individuals, a third "reality" should be recognised. This follows from philosophies of Kant and Aristotle (Maze & al., 2005a). This third, invisible term is the essence of the species that causes its morphology, its continuity over space and time, and makes evolution happen.…”