Thesis (M.L. Arch. - Renewable Natural Resources)--University of Arizona, 1988. / Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (M.S.)--University of Tennessee, Knoxville, 2003. / Title from title page screen (viewed Sept. 23, 2003). Thesis advisor: Gary McDaniel. Document formatted into pages (ix, 83 p. : ill., maps (some col.), charts). Vita. Includes bibliographical references (p. 76-79).

Inaug.-Diss.--Leipzig.

Thesis (M.L.A.)--University of Hong Kong, 2005. / Includes special report study entitled: Plant materials : understanding their range of function and aesthetics.

This thesis examines the history of botanical gardens and their evolution from ancient spaces to the modern gardens of the 20th century. I provide a brief overview of botanical gardens, with a focus on the unique intersection of public participation and scientific study that started to occur within garden spaces during the 20th century, which still continues today. I reveal the history of gardens that influenced the uses of gardens today, with a focus on: the first ancient gardens and the dependency societies had on them, the influence of science in gardens starting in the Enlightenment period, the shift away from scientific gardens and the introductions of public gardens in the early 20th century, and the reintroduction of science into gardens during the conservation movement of the 1950s.

Note:

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

There is currently considerable controversy within philosophy over how a natural kind term's extension is determined. Adherents to traditional theories of meaning argue that extension is determined by intensional properties which usually consist of identifying descriptions. Recently a new, essentialist alternative to these traditional accounts has been advocated; proponents of this view maintain that a term's extension includes all objects which are essentially the same as a given paradigm instance of the term's use. In the present thesis it is argued that both description theories and essentalism describe not how classification must proceed but rather two alternative strategies for how a classification of natural kinds might be attempted. A term's extension is not determined in advance by either identifying descriptions or hidden essential properties since stress on either of these is itself a choice. This claim is exemplified by using empirical material drawn from the recent (post 1900) history of a classifictory science, botanical systematics. By means of this evidence it is shown that both "descriptionist" and "essentialist" strategies of concept application have been (and still are) pursued by different groups of taxonomists. One consequence of the position outlined above is that classifications are conventions and that they are evaluated instrumentally. The force of this argument is best illustrated by conceiving of classifications as part of a wider network of beliefs which are socially transmitted and sustained. Changes in networks are designed to further the interests to which a network is being put. It is argued here that the main kinds of interests which have been important in twentieth century systematics are 1) interests in technical prediction and control and 2) professional vested interests. An important aspect of both these kinds of interests is that they are normally considered to be "internal" to science. It follows that to understand scientific knowledge from a sociological perspective does not, of necessity, entail commitment to "external" explanations of scientific change.