{"title":"Teleonomy: Revisiting a Proposed Conceptual Replacement for Teleology.","authors":"Max Dresow, Alan C Love","doi":"10.1007/s13752-022-00424-y","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The concept of teleonomy has been attracting renewed attention recently. This is based on the idea that teleonomy provides a useful conceptual replacement for teleology, and even that it constitutes an indispensable resource for thinking biologically about purposes. However, both these claims are open to question. We review the history of teleological thinking from Greek antiquity to the modern period to illuminate the tensions and ambiguities that emerged when forms of teleological reasoning interacted with major developments in biological thought. This sets the stage for an examination of Pittendrigh's (Adaptation, natural selection, and behavior. In: Roe A, Simpson GG (eds) Behavior and evolution. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp 390-416, 1958) introduction of \"teleonomy\" and its early uptake in the work of prominent biologists. We then explore why teleonomy subsequently foundered and consider whether the term may yet have significance for discussions of goal-directedness in evolutionary biology and philosophy of science. This involves clarifying the relationship between teleonomy and teleological explanation, as well as asking how the concept of teleonomy impinges on research at the frontiers of evolutionary theory.</p>","PeriodicalId":72374,"journal":{"name":"Biological theory","volume":"18 2","pages":"101-113"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10191995/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Biological theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13752-022-00424-y","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2
Abstract
The concept of teleonomy has been attracting renewed attention recently. This is based on the idea that teleonomy provides a useful conceptual replacement for teleology, and even that it constitutes an indispensable resource for thinking biologically about purposes. However, both these claims are open to question. We review the history of teleological thinking from Greek antiquity to the modern period to illuminate the tensions and ambiguities that emerged when forms of teleological reasoning interacted with major developments in biological thought. This sets the stage for an examination of Pittendrigh's (Adaptation, natural selection, and behavior. In: Roe A, Simpson GG (eds) Behavior and evolution. Yale University Press, New Haven, pp 390-416, 1958) introduction of "teleonomy" and its early uptake in the work of prominent biologists. We then explore why teleonomy subsequently foundered and consider whether the term may yet have significance for discussions of goal-directedness in evolutionary biology and philosophy of science. This involves clarifying the relationship between teleonomy and teleological explanation, as well as asking how the concept of teleonomy impinges on research at the frontiers of evolutionary theory.
teleonomy的概念最近再次引起了人们的关注。这是基于这样一种观点,即目的论为目的论提供了一种有用的概念替代,甚至它构成了从生物学角度思考目的的不可或缺的资源。然而,这两种说法都值得商榷。我们回顾了从古希腊到现代的目的论思想的历史,以阐明当目的论推理的形式与生物学思想的主要发展相互作用时出现的紧张和模棱两可。这为皮滕赖特的“适应、自然选择和行为”理论的检验奠定了基础。参见:Roe A, Simpson GG(编)行为与进化。耶鲁大学出版社,纽黑文,第390-416页,1958年)介绍了“遥感学”,并将其早期应用于杰出生物学家的工作中。然后,我们探讨了为什么目的论随后失败,并考虑这个术语是否可能对进化生物学和科学哲学中目标导向的讨论有意义。这包括澄清目的论和目的论解释之间的关系,以及探讨目的论的概念如何影响进化论前沿的研究。