Teleology

In philosophy, teleology is the attempt to comprehend and explain the universe in terms of ends or final causes. Teleology is based on the proposition that the universe has design and purpose, that its effects are in some manner deliberate, and that in order to understand it completely, one must take into consideration final causes. Teleologists admit that physical causes may be deterministic and agree that the object of scientific research is to discover universal laws of phenomena can be rationally explained when adequate causes are assigned to them—if the conditions of their occurrence are known. Teleology states that this determinism reveals a “direction” in nature; that is, the universe is headed toward a goal or completion. Thus, teleologists feel there is litde question regarding whether the cosmos has a final cause; rather, the question should be whether humanity has the ability to see it.

Teleology emphasizes the concept that a final cause or purpose is inherent in all humanity. There are two types of such causes—intrinsic and extrinsic finality. Extrinsic finality consists of someone realizing a purpose outside him- or herself, primarily for the welfare of others. Intrinsic finality consists of someone realizing that a purpose exists within him- or herself by means of a natural tendency directed toward the perfection of its own nature. For instance, an atom obeys quantum principles that did not evolve but nonetheless are “giv-ens.” In addition, one's life is intended to play out in a specific manner, so that one's existence protects itself from death and disease.

When extrinsic finality is overemphasized, a likelihood exists that anthropic principles might be attributed to supernatural intervention or superstition; for example, God was angry at the world so he sent a flood to destroy all terrestrial life. Intrinsic finality provides the basis for the ideological argument that God exists and for the intelligent design debate regarding how human life evolved. Teleologists feel that relying solely on Darwin's principle of natural selection is faulty, because evolution focuses exclusively on the immediate causes and mechanisms of events, never looking for a rationale that explains the synthesis of different facts. Hence, if a clock is dismantled, one discovers nothing but springs, pivots, levers, and [Page 1225]gears; on the other hand, if the mechanism causing the watch to work has been correctly formulated, could one not say that the clock was designed for the purpose of keeping time? Moreover, many philosophers state that biology is profoundly concerned with questions concerning causation and how constraint functions have affected the structure of life—Darwin's theories did not upset this thesis. For instance, when Darwin saw the various beaks of Galapagos finches, he thought that due to the area's scarcity of birds, one could surmise that a single species had been modified for different ends. This is a most un-Darwinian statement.

Historically, teleology has been associated with Aristotle, while the rationale of teleology was studied by Immanuel Kant and, again, made central to speculative philosophy by G. W. F Hegel and the various neo-Hegelian schools, including that of Karl Marx. In Hegel's opinion, individual human consciousness, as it attempts to reach for autonomy and freedom, has litde choice but to deal with an obvious fact—humanity's collective identities (the multiplicity of worldviews, ethnic, cultural, and national identities) that separate members of the human race both now and in the past and that always have and always will set different groups of people against each other in violent conflict. Hegel speculated that the “totality” of mutually antagonistic worldviews and life forms in history was best seen as being driven toward the completion of goals. In other words, a time would come at an end point in history when the “objective contradiction” of “subject” and “object” would eventually change into a form of life that has left all violent conflict behind.

...