Intended to support three-taxon analysis (3ta), the proposal that all character states be regarded as terminal would instead undercut that method. The same is true of the idea that cladistic methods should not account for plesiomorphies. Parsimony does not correspond to interpretation 1 for incompletely resolved cladograms. The main argument common to Nelson's (1996) and Nelson and Platnick's (1991) advocacy of three-taxon analysis rests on presupposing its conclusion. While suggesting that parsimony rests on an inferior evolutionary model, Nelson (1996) neither offered nor provided evidence for any alternative. 3ta sometimes favors reversal over parallelism, but in other cases may disregard reversed characters, so that the method seems to lack any coherent theoretical basis.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
James S. Farris (1997) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: