Re: Spec-X?

---

 

Do you really feel that I need to have purchased and read every single
AIS bulletin before I can express an opinion about anything here?

SZ

Quoting C*@aol.com:

>
> I think people here have risen to the challenge of answering your
> many questions as responsibly and generously as anyone might
> reasonably expect. How many have you thanked?
>
> And yes, I reiterate that some of the responsibility for your own
> education lies with you.
>
> AMW
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sean A. Zera <z*@umich.edu>
> To: i*@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Sat, Jan 1, 2011 1:46 pm
> Subject: Re: [iris-species] Spec-X?
>
>
>
>
> God forbid that anyone would try to learn something from other people
> on this forum, instead of earning that knowledge themselves.
>
> Quoting C*@aol.com:
>>
>> This is what I think:
>>
>> There is nothing the least bit unusual that a classification system
>> of anything would need to be, or benefit from,being refined over time.
>> Change is simply a positive response to ongoing thought, and may be
>> necessitated by the need to refine the system, or because that which
>> is being classified is changing, or because our understanding of
>> things changes. This is certainly not only the case of the AIS
>> system, it is also the case in the botanical world, rather
>> notoriously so.
>>
>> There is no reason whatsoever that if an iris meets the criteria for
>> IB and also a SPEC-X then it cannot be classified as both, or either.
>>
>> There is no reason to think that if one seedling is classed one way
>> its sibling---which it may or may not resemble closely--must also be
>> classified the same way. They are discrete and unique botanical
>> entities.
>>
>> There is no good reason to reclassify things every time something
>> changes. People who have an interest in these issues keep up with
>> the changes. People who don't keep up with them but who care about
>> the issues need to educate themselves. Nothing in life is static,
>> especially information.
>>
>> The purpose of the AIS classification system is to effect cogent
>> communication. It is an attempt by the collective to derive and
>> achieve concord towards an accurate descriptive vocabulary to be
>> used in discussions of a broad, numerous, various and ever expanding
>> body of unique cultivars reflecting highly personal tastes and
>> responses to a collective aesthetic vision which rewards
>> distinctiveness. It also defines what at any given time is
>> understood to be the ideal of a certain class, so that that ideal
>> may be understood and discussed, as a standard for evaluation and
>> comparison, and as a goal.
>>
>> This is not a compost heap, it is a quasi-casuistic dungpile. My
>> suggestion to anyone who seeks enlightenment here is: Read the
>> resources that AIS has published for you; buy or borrow the Check
>> Lists so you can see what they actually contain before carrying on
>> in an angry and paranoid manner; prioritize owning the basic
>> literature beyond the AIS publications and read that too; abandon
>> the idea that there is some boogeyman in the rainbow drama, and base
>> your education and opinions on verifiable facts.
>>
>> AMW
>> -------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>