  We argue that taxonomical concept development is vital for planetary science
as in all branches of science, but its importance has been obscured by unique
historical developments. The literature shows that the concept of planet
developed by scientists during the Copernican Revolution was theory-laden and
pragmatic for science. It included both primaries and satellites as planets due
to their common intrinsic, geological characteristics. About two centuries
later the non-scientific public had just adopted heliocentrism and was
motivated to preserve elements of geocentrism including teleology and the
assumptions of astrology. This motivated development of a folk concept of
planet that contradicted the scientific view. The folk taxonomy was based on
what an object orbits, making satellites out to be non-planets and ignoring
most asteroids. Astronomers continued to keep primaries and moons classed
together as planets and continued teaching that taxonomy until the 1920s. The
astronomical community lost interest in planets ca. 1910 to 1955 and during
that period complacently accepted the folk concept. Enough time has now elapsed
so that modern astronomers forgot this history and rewrote it to claim that the
folk taxonomy is the one that was created by the Copernican scientists.
Starting ca. 1960 when spacecraft missions were developed to send back detailed
new data, there was an explosion of publishing about planets including the
satellites, leading to revival of the Copernican planet concept. We present
evidence that taxonomical alignment with geological complexity is the most
useful scientific taxonomy for planets. It is this complexity of both primary
and secondary planets that is a key part of the chain of origins for life in
the cosmos.
