Conceptualization is orthogonal. It means that it can be illustrated with the color cube. This structure can be discussed in many different aspects, but most important is that it lacks a middle. The hypothetical middle is located on the middle on the diagonal between black and white, but this middle is empty per definition. If we consider it as the difference between black and white, then it is the boundary between black and white, whereas if we consider it as the gray scale, then the gray scale can’t be partitioned so to obtain a middle. Instead, black and white are the absolute parameters in this structure, whereas the gray scale is the relative parameter of it. Neither the absolute nor the relative parameters do thus have a middle. Fact is thus that conceptualization lacks a middle.
Cladistics (and particle physics) do, however, turn this fact up-side-down into that conceptualization indeed has a middle, by simply assuming, claiming and actually defining that it has. This assumption, claim and definition is thus simply wrong – conceptualization does not have a middle. Cladistics and paricle physics are thus simply wrong.
The problem that conceptualization does not hae a middle can thus not be solved by assuming, claiming or defining that it has a middle, but can only be bypassed by an approach that acknowledges that it hasn’t, like the Linnean system of classification. The strength of the the Linnean system of classification is thus not that it defeats reality, but that it obeys to reality. Facts, like the fact that conceptualization lacks a middle, can we not “solve” but only relate to. Cladistics’ (and particle particle physics’) trick to simply assume, claim and define that it has a middle does not solve the problem, but just leads from objectivity into subjectivity, that is, from science into race biology.
Cladistics and particle physics are thus plainly wrong.