What is the Taxonomic Fallacy?

Definition:

The Taxonomic Fallacy is the error of mistaking a human-defined classification or framework-dependent fact for an objective or necessary truth about reality itself.

In other words, it’s when we confuse what is true within a system (a contingent fact) for what is true regardless of any system (an objective truth).

Example:

Consider the statement, “The whale is a mammal.” This is factually correct within the conventions of biological taxonomy, a system designed by humans to categorize life. The classification depends on certain criteria, such as live birth and warm-bloodedness.

However, if early naturalists had instead defined all aquatic creatures with fins and tails as “fish,” then the whale would have been categorized differently. The whale’s anatomy and physiology do not change, only the framework of classification does.

The truth of the statement “the whale is a mammal” is therefore taxonomic, not ontological. It expresses a fact that arises from human definitions, not from the independent nature of the whale itself.

Contrast:

Compare this to a mathematical or logical statement such as “2 + 2 = 4,” which remains true in all possible frameworks. Its truth does not arise from human convention but from the intrinsic nature of quantity and logic.

Philosophical Context:

The Taxonomic Fallacy fits within the broader critique of linguistic realism (the belief that language or conceptual schemes mirror reality directly). It also echoes Locke’s distinction between nominal essences (human definitions) and real essences (things as they are), and Korzybski’s famous dictum that “the map is not the territory.”

Principle (Aphorism Form):

“The Taxonomic Fallacy is mistaking a map for the territory, believing that our categories define reality rather than describe it.”

“Facts born of definition are not truths born of nature.”

“Classification is a tool for understanding the world, not an authority over it.”

In modern terms, the Taxonomic Fallacy is a warning against confusing epistemic constructs (our systems of knowledge) with ontological reality (what exists independent of them).

In summary:

All truths correspond to reality, but not all facts correspond to ultimate reality.

Some “facts” are true relative to human systems of thought, while “objective truths” are true independent of them.