Month: November 2019

Last time we defined key terms in this section on teleology or design. Before we can conclude our survey of definitions we need to do a more thorough comparison of “purpose” and “function.”  In The Encyclopedia of Philosophy,  Morton Beckner explores the distinction between them as the crux of teleology.² Purpose by his account can be logically independent of intention or consciousness and is directed, persistent, and sensitive to a goal.The goals of systems that exhibit purposive behavior are the outcome of relatively independent dovetailing processes – that is ‘directive correlation.’ 

He uses the example of a guided missile where the independent processes are position of the target and the direction of the missile as opposed to the non-purposive activity of a river flowing to the sea. Therefore “activity is purposive if and only if it exhibits sensitivity and persistence to a goal as a result of directive correlation.”

On the other hand, functions are contributions to fundamental processes (e.g. kidney functions for excretion; or hair functions to aid in maintaining body temperature). They are part of a hierarchy of functions leading to a process, but lack sensitivity and persistence to a goal. Beckner admits the distinction between function and purpose is arguable, but makes a good case for the distinction.

In any case, a concluding summary of the definitions in the last post and Beckner’s analysis in this allows creation of the following table:

	WHY	HOW
Purpose	+++	+
Function	++	+ +
Design	+/-	+++
Intention	+	+
Chance	–	+++
Direction (Trajectory)	–	–
Meaning	+++	–

Thus purpose and meaning address why things occur while design and chance attend to how they occur. Function straddles these designations while intention and direction are more neutral words although connotatively tend to imply how and even why things happen.

Our next step is to look at chance and its relatives – complexity and chaos – as explanations of things and events in the universe.

 

¹Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, Barnes & Noble, Inc. 2003. ISBN 0-7607-4975-2, p. 1952.

²Edwards, Paul (editor), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. & The Free Press, 1972.   Volume 8, pages 88-91.

“Every definition is dangerous.” – Desiderius Erasmus, Adagia.

 

 

In looking at an issue as subtle as teleology we will have to be methodical (very much as when we addressed body and soul, and death and immortality) especially since teleology is neglected in the philosophy literature, particularly with respect to the key areas of life, history, and the universe.

Webster’s Unabridged Dictionary will be our source.¹ It defines “purpose” as “the reason for which something exists or is done, made, or used; an intended or desired result, end, or aim.” It also defines “on purpose” as by design, intentionally. Purpose then appears to be not how, but why a thing came to be or an event occurred. Science is an excellent means to determine the how, while we rely on philosophy, logic, or theology for the why.

“Function” is defined as “the kind of action or activity proper to a person, thing, or institution, the purpose of which something is designed or exists, role.” This appears to blend why and how.

“Design” has several definitions, but the relevant one for our discussion is “to plan the form or structure of; to plan and fashion artistically or skillfully.” This definition suggests design may be independent of a reason or the why of an entity or event per se. In theory then, a designer need not have a reason for his or her design.

“Intent” is defined as “the act or fact of intending,” and “intend” is defined as “to have in mind as something to be done or brought about; to design or mean for a particular purpose.” Therefore, intention may or may not include the question of why.

“Chance” is defined as “the absence of any cause of events that can be predicted, understood, or controlled.” Chance then is a particular explanation as to how something exists or how some event happens, specifically as uncaused, unpredictable, and incomprehensible. The why is unstated, but perhaps logic would say chance events and existence have no why.

“Trajectory” is defined as “the curve described by a projectile, rocket, or the like in its flight.” However  it often has connotations of “direction” meaning “the line along which anything lies, faces, moves, etc. with reference to the point or region toward which it is directed.” Trajectory or direction then implies neither how nor why, but simply records progression towards a neutral or intended end.

“Meaning” is defined as “what is intended to be or is actually expressed or indicated; significant, import; the end, purpose, or significance of something.” Meaning then is about why not how.

(continued next post)

“The more the universe seems comprehensible, the more it also seems pointless.” – Steven Weinberg, theoretical physicist.

Our next special problem is the place of teleology in the human experience of reality. The Webster’s unabridged dictionary definition of teleology starts with these two listings: (1) the doctrine that final causes exist, (2) the study of the evidences of design or purpose in nature.¹ Aristotle worked out this first meaning of teleology referring to the goal of actions as their ‘final cause” – in contrast to the material, formal, and efficient causes.² Dagobert Runes distinguishes teleology as the explanation of the past and the present in terms of the future instead of the reverse as is typical of mechanics (or physics).³ However he does not believe this requires personal consciousness, volition, or intent. On the other hand, other philosophers identify teleology as purposive or goal-directed activity.⁴ In speaking of natural phenomena, teleology typically involves a dialectic about functional selection versus intelligent design.

As was the case with human destiny, most philosophical textbooks ignore or provide only a superficial treatment of teleology, but we require a more detailed investigation. Why? Because perhaps the most pivotal consideration in regards to a meaningful life is whether reality itself is meaningful. Underlying that enigma is the interrogation of common words like purpose, function, intention, design, chance, and trajectory. We also need to establish criteria for the word – “meaning.”

This section will be divided into the following parts:

1. Definitions
2. Chance, Complexity, and Chaos
3. Uncertainty
4. Statistics and Probability
5. Natural Selection
6. Intelligent Design
7. Absurdity
8. Anthropocentrism
9. Alternative Views
10. Criteria for “Meaning”
11. Synthesis

This area is in my opinion the least clarified by philosophy as it stands today, and by far the most important area which has been neglected. If Professor Weinberg is correct (see epigram above), then despite humanism’s insistence to the contrary, our individual lives are as pointless as the universe. Let’s hope our investigation leads us to a different conclusion.

—————————————–

¹Webster’s New Universal Unabridged Dictionary, Barnes & Noble, Inc. 2003. ISBN 0-7607-4975-2, p. 1952.

²See post titled Causation dated 7/19/19 on this site.

³Runes, Dagobert D., Dictionary of Philosophy. Philosophical Library, New York, 1960, p.315.

⁴Edwards, Paul (editor), The Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc. & The Free Press, 1972.   Volume 8, page 88.

—————————————–

Having trouble leaving a question or comment?  E-mail me at gregoryciliberti@gmail.com