Through The Looking-Glass

I would assume that they're classified by anatomical features, just like real animals. However, if that were the case, then Pidgeot, Drifblim, and Gyarados would all have to have the same anatomical features, so I'm not so sure about using only anatomy to determine classification :P

The answer to all of those questions: Game Freak decides.

Originally Posted by TheMissingno.

The answer to all of those questions: Game Freak decides.

But I'm speaking from an in-universe perspective here.

Originally Posted by Jabberwocky

But I'm speaking from an in-universe perspective here.

But there's a Game Freak building in the games. :P

Originally Posted by Arc

But there's a Game Freak building in the games. :P

There's nothing to suggest that, in-universe, Game Freak is anything beyond a normal gaming company, save for a few wall-breaking comments.

I seem to recall the artistic director in Blue version saying "I drew you."

I've always found this an interesting issue. Regarding Pokémon typology, my pet theory is that Pokémon types are determined by the composition of their auras, which reflects the kind of energy the mon runs on. The type of energy their auras possess determines their type e.g. a Charmander is Fire-type because it predominantly runs on Fire energy. Dual typed mons have auras largely composed of one type of energy and another (the more abundant energy being the primary type, and the less abundant one being secondary).

The similar features shared between Pokémon of one type are the result of these Pokémon being adapted to utilise/produce this energy, and so they have class characteristics unique to their "type". These class characteristics are what give the types their name. For example, the Fire-type is named as such because most of the Pokémon that give off the energy signature of this type learn a lot of Fire moves, and have fiery anatomies.

This idea also leaves room for outliers, such as Flygon/Vibrava, which would be classed as Bug types, not Dragon, based on anatomical features. However, if they have the energy signature of the Dragon-type, then they can still be called as such without displaying the common class features. This also explains the discovery of Dark & Steel too; the development of more sensitive detection equipment and the increase in research into types may reveal more energy signatures over time, requiring the reclassification of certain Pokémon and moves, despite them being right under the researchers' noses. But that's just me.

I'm more intrigued by how pokémon evolve. As in, natural selection, not the pokémon style evolution. How do things even evolve naturally when it can evolve over short time to become something completely different? You'd think that have some consequences.

As for how the species name are decided, in-universe I would assume it's just a bunch of guys getting drunk and making up silly name based on completely obvious traits.
Of course, the real species names are probably decided the same way when it comes down to Gamefreak and the translation team.

Originally Posted by H-con

I'm more intrigued by how pokémon evolve. As in, natural selection, not the pokémon style evolution. How do things even evolve naturally when it can evolve over short time to become something completely different? You'd think that have some consequences.

Intelligent design.

Originally Posted by TheMissingno.

Intelligent design.

Sounds about right. I can already imagine Arceus going:
"Hey, let's create a pokémon who's life depend on the flame on it's tail! That's some might fine, intelligent design right there!"

Originally Posted by TheMissingno.

I seem to recall the artistic director in Blue version saying "I drew you."

Hence why I said "excepting certain wall-breaking comments."

Originally Posted by Green Zubat

I've always found this an interesting issue. Regarding Pokémon typology, my pet theory is that Pokémon types are determined by the composition of their auras, which reflects the kind of energy the mon runs on. The type of energy their auras possess determines their type e.g. a Charmander is Fire-type because it predominantly runs on Fire energy. Dual typed mons have auras largely composed of one type of energy and another (the more abundant energy being the primary type, and the less abundant one being secondary).

The similar features shared between Pokémon of one type are the result of these Pokémon being adapted to utilise/produce this energy, and so they have class characteristics unique to their "type". These class characteristics are what give the types their name. For example, the Fire-type is named as such because most of the Pokémon that give off the energy signature of this type learn a lot of Fire moves, and have fiery anatomies.

This idea also leaves room for outliers, such as Flygon/Vibrava, which would be classed as Bug types, not Dragon, based on anatomical features. However, if they have the energy signature of the Dragon-type, then they can still be called as such without displaying the common class features. This also explains the discovery of Dark & Steel too; the development of more sensitive detection equipment and the increase in research into types may reveal more energy signatures over time, requiring the reclassification of certain Pokémon and moves, despite them being right under the researchers' noses. But that's just me.

A very, very interesting theory!