Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-Darwin
It is often assumed that direction and purpose in nature—teleology—is a dead relic of the past, a result of Charles Darwin’s <i>Origin of Species</i> (1859) and <i>Descent of Man</i> (1871). But teleology has had a long and complex relationship with science. This paper will t...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
MDPI AG
2020-06-01
|
| Series: | Religions |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/11/6/298 |
| _version_ | 1797564890015072256 |
|---|---|
| author | Michael A. Flannery |
| author_facet | Michael A. Flannery |
| author_sort | Michael A. Flannery |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | It is often assumed that direction and purpose in nature—teleology—is a dead relic of the past, a result of Charles Darwin’s <i>Origin of Species</i> (1859) and <i>Descent of Man</i> (1871). But teleology has had a long and complex relationship with science. This paper will trace its general history with an emphasis upon the life sciences, especially biology. Particularly important is the fact that all teleology is not equal; strong (transcendent) teleology (designated T<sub>s</sub>) should be distinguished from weak (purely descriptive and utilitarian) teleology (designated T<sub>w</sub>). A working definition of teleology in its most meaningful aspects is then given. The challenges that Darwinism faced in dealing with purpose in nature are discussed, as is their proposed solution in the evolutionary synthesis, and the persistence of T<sub>s</sub> following that synthesis is outlined and critiqued. Evidence of T<sub>s</sub> persistence in the life sciences is presented with several relevant examples, and strong teleology is further differentiated by specific (T<sub>s+</sub>) and nonspecific (T<sub>s−</sub>) varieties. This essay concludes that T<sub>s</sub> remains an ongoing and integral part of the life sciences and will likely remain so, even though it may be true but not verifiable empirically. |
| first_indexed | 2024-03-10T19:04:15Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-7d3807ccb103453daa752fd6c23e12a5 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2077-1444 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-03-10T19:04:15Z |
| publishDate | 2020-06-01 |
| publisher | MDPI AG |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Religions |
| spelling | doaj.art-7d3807ccb103453daa752fd6c23e12a52023-11-20T04:13:23ZengMDPI AGReligions2077-14442020-06-0111629810.3390/rel11060298Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-DarwinMichael A. Flannery0UAB Libraries, University of Alabama at Birmingham, 1720 University Blvd, Birmingham, AL 35294, USAIt is often assumed that direction and purpose in nature—teleology—is a dead relic of the past, a result of Charles Darwin’s <i>Origin of Species</i> (1859) and <i>Descent of Man</i> (1871). But teleology has had a long and complex relationship with science. This paper will trace its general history with an emphasis upon the life sciences, especially biology. Particularly important is the fact that all teleology is not equal; strong (transcendent) teleology (designated T<sub>s</sub>) should be distinguished from weak (purely descriptive and utilitarian) teleology (designated T<sub>w</sub>). A working definition of teleology in its most meaningful aspects is then given. The challenges that Darwinism faced in dealing with purpose in nature are discussed, as is their proposed solution in the evolutionary synthesis, and the persistence of T<sub>s</sub> following that synthesis is outlined and critiqued. Evidence of T<sub>s</sub> persistence in the life sciences is presented with several relevant examples, and strong teleology is further differentiated by specific (T<sub>s+</sub>) and nonspecific (T<sub>s−</sub>) varieties. This essay concludes that T<sub>s</sub> remains an ongoing and integral part of the life sciences and will likely remain so, even though it may be true but not verifiable empirically.https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/11/6/298teleologyteleonomyteleometryDarwinismneo-Darwinian synthesisevolution |
| spellingShingle | Michael A. Flannery Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-Darwin Religions teleology teleonomy teleometry Darwinism neo-Darwinian synthesis evolution |
| title | Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-Darwin |
| title_full | Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-Darwin |
| title_fullStr | Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-Darwin |
| title_full_unstemmed | Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-Darwin |
| title_short | Strong and Weak Teleology in the Life Sciences Post-Darwin |
| title_sort | strong and weak teleology in the life sciences post darwin |
| topic | teleology teleonomy teleometry Darwinism neo-Darwinian synthesis evolution |
| url | https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/11/6/298 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT michaelaflannery strongandweakteleologyinthelifesciencespostdarwin |