Consequence etiology and biological teleology in Aristotle and Darwin

Abstract
Aristotle’s biological teleology is rooted in an epigenetic account of reproduction. As such, it is best interpreted by consequence etiology. I support this claim by citing the capacity of consequence etiology’s key distinctions to explain Aristotle’s opposition to Empedocles. There are implications for the relation between ancient and modern biology. The analysis reveals that in an important respect Darwin’s account of adaptation is closer to Aristotle’s than to Empedocles’s. They both rely on consequence etiological considerations to evade attributing the purposiveness of organisms to chance. Two implications follow: Darwinian explanations of adaptation are as teleological as Aristotle’s, albeit differently; and these differences show how deeply resistant Aristotle’s version of biological teleology is to descent from a common ancestor
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1016/j.shpsc.2008.09.001
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history
Request removal from index
Download options
Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 27,651
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library
References found in this work BETA
Functional Analysis.Robert C. Cummins - 1975 - Journal of Philosophy 72 (November):741-64.
Aristotle on Natural Teleology.John M. Cooper - 1982 - In M. Schofield & M. C. Nussbaum (eds.), Language and Logos. Cambridge University Press. pp. 197--222.
Darwin Was a Teleologist.James G. Lennox - 1993 - Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):409-421.
The Effect of Essentialism on Taxonomy--Two Thousand Years of Stasis (I).David L. Hull - 1964 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 15 (60):314-326.

View all 17 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Adaptation as Process: The Future of Darwinism and the Legacy of Theodosius Dobzhansky.David J. Depew - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C 42 (1):89-98.
Adaptation as Process: The Future of Darwinism and the Legacy of Theodosius Dobzhansky.David J. Depew - 2011 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 42 (1):89-98.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles
Necessitarianism and Teleology in Aristotle's Biology.Robert Friedman - 1986 - Biology and Philosophy 1 (3):355-365.
Fitness.Alexander Rosenberg - 2008 - Journal of Philosophy.
Fitness.Alexander Rosenberg - 1983 - Journal of Philosophy 80 (8):457-473.
Aristotle on Teleology.Johnson Monte Ransome - 2005 - Oxford University Press.
Darwin Was a Teleologist.James G. Lennox - 1993 - Biology and Philosophy 8 (4):409-421.
Aristotle's Teleology.Rich Cameron - 2010 - Philosophy Compass 5 (12):1096-1106.

Monthly downloads

Added to index

2009-01-28

Total downloads

70 ( #74,957 of 2,169,322 )

Recent downloads (6 months)

2 ( #186,284 of 2,169,322 )

How can I increase my downloads?

My notes
Sign in to use this feature


Discussion
Order:
There  are no threads in this forum
Nothing in this forum yet.

Other forums