 The biologist Michael Ghiselin piqued the interest of philosophers when he suggested that systematics was fundamentally mistaken about the ontological status of biological species (Ghiselin 1974). Species were not natural kinds in the way that chemical elements are. Instead, they are historical particulars like nations or galaxies. They have a beginning through speciation, they have parts that are integrated over time by biological relations, and they cease to exist by going extinct (Mishler &amp; Brandon 1987). Additionally, individual organisms are not instances of species, as a wedding ring is an instance of gold. Instead, they are parts of species, as one is a part of a family. As Smart had earlier noticed, this has the implication that there can be no “laws of nature” about biological species per se, at least in the traditional sense of ‘laws of nature’ (Smart 1959). David Hull further developed and argued for the “species as individuals” thesis. He explored its implications for a variety of topics including species names, laws of nature, and human nature (Hull 1976, 1978, 1986). 