1. You're arguing with the author, who isn't here.
2. The problem with your approach is that people instantaneously leap from "capable of knowing" to "knowing", and they do this all the time.
So anything that reminds you that you are definitely wrong is a useful tool, just as ontologies are helpful tools (and wrong).
3. "genus" does not exist. "species" does not exist. "clade" could exist in limited cases but is inevitably incomplete. (Consider that you are pointing at creatures and their offspring without thinking about their microbiomes, among other things.)
2. The problem with your approach is that people instantaneously leap from "capable of knowing" to "knowing", and they do this all the time.
So anything that reminds you that you are definitely wrong is a useful tool, just as ontologies are helpful tools (and wrong).
3. "genus" does not exist. "species" does not exist. "clade" could exist in limited cases but is inevitably incomplete. (Consider that you are pointing at creatures and their offspring without thinking about their microbiomes, among other things.)