4 ms·
The four kingdoms system is taught because it is useful; not for science, but for everyday communication. We use a similarly flawed model every day: fruit and
by dvdkon 2y ago
The four kingdoms system is taught because it is useful; not for science, but for everyday communication.
We use a similarly flawed model every day: fruit and vegetables. What's in one group or the other is based on vague similarities and is mostly arbitrary, but it's still useful to split the huge category of "edible plant parts" into more manageable chunks.
Anyone familiar with apples and pears will likely see an orange and say it's a fruit. Likewise anyone familiar with cats and dogs will see a boar and think "animal", not "plant" or "fungus". A genetics-based assessment would be more "correct", yes, but impossible on a walk or in the store.
Primary school teachers, from my experience, have a tendency to present things as "the truth" and accept no deviation from their own word. I think changing that would be a good step in fostering creativity in children, much more than skipping less-accurate models.
- thaumasiotes 2y ago> We use a similarly flawed model every day: fruit and vegetables. What's in one group or the other is based on vague similarities and is mostly arbitrary, but it's still useful to split the huge category of "edible plant parts" into more manageable chunks. This is completely wrong. Those categories aren't any smaller, in a practical sense, than the combined category "plants". The gain in manageability is zero. The reason we divide the categories that way is that we put them to different purposes, not that they'd be too large if combined.