How to be a Realist about sui generis Teleology Yet Feel at Home in the 21st Century
The Monist 87 (1):72-95 (2004)
| Abstract | The reigning orthodoxy on biological teleology assumes that teleology either must be reduced (or eliminated) or it depends on a supernatural agent. The dominant orthodox sect rejects supernaturalism and eliminitivism, and, given the poverty of competing views has been allowed to become complacent about the adequacy of favored reductivist accounts. These are beset by more serious problems than proponents acknowledge. Moreover, the assumption underlying orthodoxy is false; there is an alternative scientifically and philosophically plausible naturalistic account of teleology. We can share reductivists’ realism about biological teleology, embrace ontological and epistemological naturalism about science as well as science’s the ontic authority yet accept sui generis teleology conceived along ontologically emergentist lines. I sketch one such emergentist account, one that deserves serious consideration if supernaturalism and eliminitivism are as impoverished as reductionists believe. | |||||||||
| Keywords | naturalism ontology emergence biological teleology functions | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
  |
| External links |
|
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesRich Cameron (2003). The Ontology of Aristotle's Final Cause. Apeiron 35 (2):153-79.
Mohan Matthen (1991). Naturalism and Teleology. Journal of Philosophy 88 (11):656-657.
Rich Cameron (2010). Aristotle's Teleology. Philosophy Compass 5 (12):1096-1106.
Willem A. deVries (1991). The Dialectic of Teleology. Philosophical Topics 19 (2):51-70.
Hannah Ginsborg (2006). Kant's Biological Teleology and Its Philosophical Significance. In A Companion to Kant. Blackwell Publishing.
Marcel Quarfood (2006). Kant on Biological Teleology: Towards a Two-Level Interpretation. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 37 (4):735-747.
Peter McLaughlin (1990). Kant's Critique of Teleology in Biological Explanation: Antinomy and Teleology. E. Mellen Press.
M. Ratcliffe (2000). The Function of Function. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 31 (1):113-133.
Andrew Woodfield (1976). Teleology. Cambridge University Press.
Attila Grandpierre (2012). A Biological Account of Design in Nature. In Swan Liz, Gordon Richard & Seckbach Joseph (eds.), Origin of Design in Nature.
Robert C. Koons (1998). Teleology as Higher-Order Causation: A Situation-Theoretic Account. Minds and Machines 8 (4):559-585.
F. J. K. Soontiëns (1991). Evolution: Teleology or Chance? Journal for General Philosophy of Science 22 (1):133-141.
Daniel Kolb (1992). Kant, Teleology, and Evolution. Synthese 91 (1-2):9 - 28.
Frederick S. Carney (1978). On McCormick and Teleological Morality. Journal of Religious Ethics 6 (1):81 - 107.
Jeffrey Wattles (2006). Teleology Past and Present. Zygon 41 (2):445-464.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2010-10-28Total downloads66 ( #13,578 of 548,973 )Recent downloads (6 months)40 ( #813 of 548,973 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
