Cladism’s error in reasoning and its consequences

Cladism’s error in reasoning resides in the relation between its phylogenetic analysis and its ”parsimony criterion”. The problem is that they together, in practice, also assumes that the phylogeny is totally symmetrical, since this kind of phylogenies have the shortest branch lengths and thus are the most parsimonious results. This assumption does not appear irrational in itself, although extremely unlikely, but cladisms worst problem is that it cannot find such a phylogeny even if it should be the true phylogeny, since the relation between things and their properties are ambiguous. It means that the cladistic (parsimonious) analysis would be tipping between the closest alternatives to this true phylogeny, without any possibility to choose between them: what is true for things is not true for properties and vice versa. This is the end of the return alley that is called cladistics (or cladism). At this point, cladism have to return to a scientific comprehension by acknowledging paraphyletic groups to acknowledge the true phylogeny, because the true phylogeny is paraphyletic in its context. Cladism’s inconsistent denial of paraphyletic groups will thus ultimately lead it to a paraphyletic group. Some may call this end “the irony of fate”, but I prefer to call it ”the irony of faith”. What faith denies will ultimately be starring it in its eyes. Science is different. It only denies hypotheses and approaches that do not agree with facts (like cladism).