Mark Alan Hershkovitz

Systematic/macroevolutionary biology has dedicated much of the past 50 years of its
energy and resources in an effort to resolve definitively the one true ‘tree of life’ and to explain
materially its cause. But, no matter the quantity/quality of data, experimentation, and analysis,
the effort is hampered by persistent and ever-accumulating contradictory observations. This may
be an indication that the source of the problem lies in the observer rather than the observed.
Observations do not conflict with themselves; they conflict with theoretical expectations. Thus,
systematic and evolutionary biology requires epistemological overhaul. Rather than continued
misaligning of evidence with theory, theory must be realigned with the evidence. Evidence
suggests that the Darwinian reductionist perspective is the epistemological driver of considerable
conflict/contradiction in systematic/evolutionary research, and that robust non-Darwinian
theories not only better reconcile observations, but also provide a superior investigative
perspective.