It’s easier to keep track of the underlying relatedness as if it were an “essence” (even though patterns of physical DNA aren’t metaphysical essences), rather than the all of the messy high-dimensional similarities and differences of everything you might notice about an organism.
Hmm, isn’t DNA metaphysical essences?
IIRC, the metaphysical notion of essence came from noticing similarities between different creatures, that they seemed to cluster together in species as if constructed according to some blueprint. The reason for these similarities is the DNA—if “essences” had to correspond to anything in reality, then that would seem to be DNA.
Wait, but this would also apply to similarities of convergent evolution in similar niches. There’s the essence of sight, the essence of flight, the essence of water-dwelling, the essence of hunting.
Hmm, isn’t DNA metaphysical essences?
IIRC, the metaphysical notion of essence came from noticing similarities between different creatures, that they seemed to cluster together in species as if constructed according to some blueprint. The reason for these similarities is the DNA—if “essences” had to correspond to anything in reality, then that would seem to be DNA.
It could be considered an essence, but physical rather than metaphysical.
Wait, but this would also apply to similarities of convergent evolution in similar niches. There’s the essence of sight, the essence of flight, the essence of water-dwelling, the essence of hunting.