A classification of teleology in biology & cosmology.
Despite, or perhaps because of, its widespread use and contentiousness, there has sometimes been confusion about what exactly constitutes ‘teleology’. This paper provides a classification system of types of teleological phenomena and applies the framework to debates on the suitability of teleology i...
| Publicado en: | Synthese Vol. 205; no. 4; pp. 1 - 28 |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Artículo |
| Publicado: |
Springer Nature
Apr2025
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=184282635&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: hlh uiTerm: 184282635 longDbName: Humanities International Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: jinfo: jid: 00397857 4LI jtl: Synthese issn: 00397857 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: Apr2025 vid: 205 iid: 4 pid: 237 pub: Springer Nature artinfo: ui: 184282635 10.1007/s11229-025-04985-w ppf: 1 ppct: 27 formats: fmt: – @attributes: type: T – @attributes: type: P size: 1.1MB tig: atl: A classification of teleology in biology & cosmology. aug: au: Levesley, Nichole affil: https://ror.org/013meh722 Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK sug: keyword: Anthropic principles End-directedness Goal-directedness Self-determination Teleology ab: Despite, or perhaps because of, its widespread use and contentiousness, there has sometimes been confusion about what exactly constitutes ‘teleology’. This paper provides a classification system of types of teleological phenomena and applies the framework to debates on the suitability of teleology in the life and physical sciences. The first part of the paper draws from accounts of goal-directed behaviour in biology and cosmology to construct the classification. I argue that there are two distinct behaviours that have traditionally been labelled ‘teleological’: (i) end-directedness and (ii) self-determination. I then highlight three other, orthogonal distinctions which further clarify the type of teleology in question, namely internal vs. external, intentional vs. non-intentional, and specific vs. unspecific. The second part of the paper applies this framework to two cases: debates between intrinsic and extrinsic teleology in biology, and anthropic principles and fine-tuning arguments in cosmology. In the first instance, I show how the distinction between the two concerns not just whether the teleology is internal or external, but also the type of teleology (end-directedness or self-determination) posited. In the second instance, I show how anthropic principles posit substantively different kinds of teleological behaviour, some of which, I argue, are usually viewed as unscientific, whereas others are generally considered admissible in science. The final part of the paper sketches some suggestions for how the problems surrounding teleology in science should be reconceptualized and applies the framework to resolve a current debate: between the organizational account and field theory. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: Article src: R language: English refInfo: copyright: @attributes: flag: Y custom: Synthese is a copyright of Springer, 2025. All Rights Reserved. item: Synthese holder: Springer Nature dt: @attributes: year: 2025 holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|