I’m not sure whether you’ve lost or gained a negative, but I don’t have a strong objection to the occasional use of paraphyletic groups either in biology or less formal circumstances where appropriate. I think it’s quite OK to be interested in “reptiles” or “gram negative bacteria” even if a cladist can’t understand the terms.
Seeing as how the entirety of organic history exists thanks to communication — even rudimentary chemical exchanges between cells qualify — it makes perfect sense that many find the concept utterly engaging. Language pervades everything, building and destroying as time marches ever forward. And while even the most learned scholars can't even begin to fully explain its physiology, origins, structures and pretty much every other component, they've certainly done a pretty lovely job scratching the surface. Maybe a subcutaneous layer or two. While far more illuminating reads beyond these sit on the shelves, crammed with gripping concepts, the following provide a fantastic introduction. Diverse perspectives and suggestions abound, but don't think these necessarily represent all the possible answers!
Rivista Italiana di Filosofia del Linguaggio - - - ISSN 2036-6728
"In one way or another," states Lenin, "all official and liberal science defends wage-slavery… To expect science to be impartial in a wage-slave society is as foolishly naïve as to expect impartiality from manufacturers on the question of whether workers' wages ought not to be increased by decreasing the profits of capital."