( xviii ) 



fiicts niul for tlie result of lengthy indiictious. The name as such is not part 

 of science ; we miglit employ a number, or a letter, or some other sign instead 

 without interfering in the least witli that part of knowledge which is thus 

 designated. 



It is obvious that these deductions * which ajiply to science in general ajiply 

 also to the nomenclature of classificatory work, if the work is meant to be 

 scientific in all its branches. Facts and ideas in classification require explanation 

 like any other facts and ideas in science. Families, subfauiilies, and all the other 

 classificatory units down to the individual varieties require exposition by definition. 

 The definitions bring into order the chaotic mass of individuals which forms the 

 subject of classificatory research. However, instead of operating with the defi- 

 nitions, the systematist employs, for the sake of brevity, names for them, thus 

 simplifying reference. Every name is a tenu for a definition. 



It follows from tiiis that a name which is not a term for a definition — i.e. 

 for which no definition has been given — has no standing. Naked names, with 

 which classification has been favoured in abundance, are no valid terms ; they 

 become so only from the time when the fact or idea is published for which 

 they are meant to be employed as a convenient means of reference, and therefore 

 cannot take jtrecedence over a name which has been defined before that time. 

 An author who publishes a name for a genus, variety, family, etc., either has 

 some kind of definition in his head — and then he should not keep this definition 

 a secret, — or he has not — and then he should not propose a name for something 

 he docfs not know, and of which therefore he cannot be certain that it exists at- 

 all. The action of an author who publishes naked names is as indefensible as 

 would be that of a describer who published names for the respective subspecies, 

 for instance, of those Oriental Papilios which are as yet not known from certain 

 islands, but which doubtless occur there, and which are certainly difterent from 

 the subspecies of all other places. We appeal to secretaries of scientific societies 

 and to the editors of scientific journals to suppress all new names which are 

 not accompanied by some kind of definition. Systematic work should no longer 

 adhere to the bad habits of the middle of the last century, when the Linnean 

 method of classification, though so young in years, had already become weak as 

 if from old age and had lost its vigour, and classifying was to a great extent 

 more a pastime than a science. A catalogue of names like Dejean's, containing 

 thousands of nomina nuda, jmblished there for the first time, is, we hope, au 

 impossibility in our time ; but single nomina niuht still at the jireseut day 

 appear even in works professing to be scientific. 



It follows further, that, if we do not wish to jeopardise altogether the 

 efficiency of nomenclature as a convenient means of reference and communication, 

 and thus eftace the motive which induces scientists to burden themselves with 

 a nomenclature, it is absolutely necessary that a definition should be replaced 



We iindoi-.-t:iU(i under deduetion tlie process o£ reasoning by which we conclude from a general 

 law the correctness of single cases; under inductUni the process of reasoning by which from single 

 cases a general law is formulated. 



