Teleology and Randomness in the Development of Natural Science Research: Systems, Ontology and Evolution

7/30/2019 Teleology and Randomness in the Development of Natural Science Research: Systems, Ontology and Evolution

1/17

TELEOLOGY AND RANDOMNESS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL SCIENCERESEARCH: SYSTEMS, ONTOLOGY AND EVOLUTION

Paulo Pereira Martins Junior

Vitor Vieira Vasconcelos

1 PhD. Geologist. Federal University of Ouro Preto (UFOP), Brazil. Foundation Technological Center of

Minas Gerais (CETEC-MG), Minas Gerais State, Brazil.

2 Legislative Consultant of Environment and Sustainable Management at the Legislative Power of Minas

Gerais State, Brazil. PhD. student in Geology. Master of Arts in Geography. Specialist in Soil and

Environment. Bachelor in Philosophy. Environmental Technician. Computer Science Technician.

Paper originally published in Portuguese, at:

MARTINS JUNIOR, P.P.; VASCONCELOS, Vitor Vieira. Teleologia e Aleatoriedade no Estudo das

Cincias da Natureza: sistemas, ontologia e evoluo. Interthesis, v. 8, n. 2, p. 316-334, jul/dec.

2011. Available at:

http://www.periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/interthesis/article/view/1807-1384.2011v8n2p316/20579

Translation by Harriet Reis, in november, 2012


2/17

TELEOLOGY AND RANDOMNESS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL SCIENCERESEARCH: SYSTEMS, ONTOLOGY AND EVOLUTION

A TELEOLOGIA E A ALEATORIEDADE NO ESTUDO DAS CINCIAS DA NATUREZA:

SISTEMAS, ONTOLOGIA E EVOLUO

TELEOLOGA Y ALEATORIEDAD EN LA INVESTIGACIN DE LAS CIENCIAS DE LANATURALEZA: SISTEMAS, ONTOLOGA Y EVOLUCIN

Summary: This is an investigation about the subject of Teleology, which has beendealt with all along the history of the human thought with special emphasis on the intervalrelated to the development of scientific theories referring to the study of Nature. Thepresentation of the subject starts with the conceptual definitions of Teleology. Following,this subject is revisited all along the concepts historical application in the development ofscience. In this respect, the first approach is about teleology in Biology and life sciences

with emphasis on the repercussion over the vitalist conception and natural selection.Hence, the discussion revolves around the dialectic conceptions of teleological systemsand random systems. Finally, this paper finishes with a thought about how these themesmay be pertinent within the environmental studies whereupon physical, biological andhuman systems are in co-operation, with the various applications of nuances and uses ofthe teleological concept.

Keywords: Teleology. Biology. Science. Epistemology. Environment

Resumo: Prope-se uma investigao sobre a temtica da Teleologia, como

tratada no decorrer da histria do pensamento humano, e com especial enfoque nointercurso relacionado ao desenvolvimento das teorias cientficas referentes ao estudo daNatureza. A apresentao do tema comea com definies conceituais sobre teleologia.Em seguida revisitado o caminho histrico trilhado pelo conceito de teleologia nodesenvolvimento cientfico. Em um primeiro tpico, ser tratada a questo da teleologianas cincias biolgicas e da vida, com nfase na repercusso das teorias vitalistas eseleo natural. Em seguida, contraposta a concepo dialtica de sistemasteleolgicos e sistemas aleatrios. Finda-se o artigo com uma reflexo sobre como ostemas tratados so pertinentes dentro do rea de estudos das cincias ambientais, ondeso conjugados sistemas fsicos, biolgicos e humanos, com as diversas nuances eutilizaes de conceitos teleolgicos.

Palavras-chave: Teleologia. Biologia. Cincia. Epistemologia. Meio Ambiente

Resumen: Propone-se una investigacin sobre la temtica de la teleologa en elcurso de la historia del pensamiento humano, con especial atencin a las relaciones conel desarrollo de las teoras cientficas sobre el estudio de la naturaleza. La presentacindel tema comienza con las definiciones conceptuales de la teleologa. A continuacin, seretoma el camino histrico recorrido por el concepto de teleologa en el desarrollocientfico. En un primer tema se aborda los asuntos sobre la teleologa en las ciencias

biolgicas y de la vida, especialmente en el impacto de las teoras vitalistas y la seleccin


3/17

natural. Luego, se contrasta la dialctica de los sistemas teleolgicos y de los sistemas dealeatoriedad. El artculo finaliza con una reflexin sobre cmo las cuestiones planteadasson pertinentes en el rea de estudios de ciencias ambientales, donde se unen sistemasfsicos, biolgicos y humanos, con los diversos matices y usos de los conceptos

teleolgicos.

Palabras claves: Teleologa. Biologa. Ciencia. Epistemologa. Ambiente.

1. Introduction The Teleology Notion

Teleology is derived from two Greek words: telos (end, goal, purpose) and logos

(reason, explanation). Teleology, therefore, is a reason or explanation for something in

function of its end, purpose or goal (VILLA, 2000, p. 723). In synthesis, the concept or

ideas of teleology can be defined as a Doctrine that considers the world as a system of

relationships between means and ends (FERREIRA, 1986, p. 1658).

Before starting the historical considerations, it is worthy to observe that the

teleology concept can be applied as much in the field of rational cognitive processes as in

natural processes and these two situations do not necessarily converge for a clear

understanding of the issues. On the other hand, the thought, that is necessarily finalistic,

can serve to understand aspects of the real world that are not finalistic.

Ernst Mayr pointed out that the concept of teleology, in the history of philosophy and

the sciences, is used in various contexts, referring to several structurally different

phenomena (MAYR, 2005, p. 65-82). The history of the use of the teleological concept is

fundamental for a better understanding of the significance attributed to this concept, and

this article aims to demonstrate this. Within the processes and phenomena to which the

concept of teleology is traditionally applied, Mayr points out the following:

A) Teleomatism: relates to the perception that certain characteristics of a

phenomenon, system, or process under study presents a tendency to develop towards afinal state. That is, when given a pre-determined initial state, it would seem valid to infer

that it would necessarily follow its determined path until the end.

B) Selective characteristics: occur in situations in which various objects (such as

complex systems) are randomly produced, having different characteristics and

organizations among themselves, and that due to ambient constraints, only a limited

number of them manage to survive after a time. In this case, it is common to respond,

when asked why some characteristics of the object exist, that it has or had a function that


4/17

guaranteed its survival, even though after deeper analysis, it is necessary to recognize

that this characteristic was generated randomly, or to say the least, that is was not the

objects premeditated desire.

C) Teleonomy : occurs when an object or system is directed towards a goal to be

achieved. To achieve this goal (considered final cause), the object adapts itself by

generating characteristics and restrictions whereby it calculates the best manner in which

to attain its objective. Teleonomycan be understood with an analogy to the programming

concept, by which the systems spatial organization becomes apt to search for certain

goals in a more or less efficient manner, and in doing so, regulates the processes and

actions of the system. Mayr, within this same analogy, also proposes a differentiation

between closed programming (in which the goals and manners to achieve them arepreviously defined at the beginning of the process) and open programming (where the

program or even the goals can be altered along the history of the system, depending on its

interaction with the surroundings) (MAYR, 2005, p. 69-75; BERTEN, 2004, p. 91-98).

D) Purposeful behavior: the understanding of this type of phenomenon requires

the presupposed existence of an individual who can think. This individual sets up his own

goals to be fulfilled and intentionally acts in a manner to achieve these goals. The main

characteristic of purposeful behavior is the recognition that there is a complex analyticalsystem that is aware of these goals (or part of them) and tries to satisfy them through

thinking activities (MAYR, 2005, p. 75; ATLAN, 2001).

E) Cosmic teleology: refers to the attribution of a purpose or goal incarnated

transcendentally in the entirety of what is being studied (nature, universe, cosmos, etc.) or

even placed and directed by something or someone above this totality. Mayr strongly

criticized the use of this supposed transcendent teleology connected with scientific

theories (MAYR, 2005, p. 38-39).Historically, the systems and models used for final explanations were

paradigmatically counterposed to the model used for strictly causal explanations (also

called the causal efficient model - with its respective ontology, successes and intertwining

relationships, completely indifferent to the proposals or outcome of that which happens

(VILLA, 2000, p. 724)). It is enough to specify that the final model is not incompatible with

the causal interactions. Actually, a final model could easily include a causal model, once

the presupposed ontology and methodology of the causal model that the causal


5/17

interactions are the only things that there are to know are disregarded. However,

metaphysical requirements and the final ontological model are criticized by defenders of

the explicative causal models as being unfounded delusions, methodologically incorrect

and obstacles to investigating the world (VILLA, 2000, p. 724-725).

2. Development

2.1 Teleology in the History of Natural Science

For this topic, Biology was chosen as the focus, since it is the science of nature in

which the debate about teleological application most applies for its explanations andscientific presuppositions. Initially, it is worth mentioning that Biology can be traditionally

divided into two different fields: functionaland historical(MAYR, 2005, p. 39). Functional

Biologycan be defined as that which deals with the physiology of all of the activities of

living organisms above all, with all cellular processes, including those involving genome

(MAYR, 2005, p. 39-40); it investigates organisms as they appear to scientists and usually

results are anchored to functional causal explanations coming from physical chemistry.

Historical Biologydeals with the evolution of living organisms along Earth ages and tries todiscover what makes organisms transform during a time span; its principal method for

investigation is the use of historical narrations (MAYR, 2005, p. 40-49), by which

hypothetical scenarios are created and supported with scarce paleontological finds. It is a

science that is closer to History than the Exact Sciences. In both biological fields, teleology

is present as will be seen below.

Mainly referring to the field of Functional Biology, the clear dissimilarity between

living organisms and inanimate objects brought about a curiosity as to what makes livingcreatures so different. This difference markedly includes the observation of a clear

teleology that applies to living organisms, as demonstrated by Kant in his Critique of

Judgment (PASCAL, 2001). A first attempt to explain this was in Vitalism, which initially

raised the hypothesis of a vital fluid that was an exotic substance present only in living

creatures. However, this first approach was rapidly abandoned, since it could not

satisfactorily separate this fluid from the other chemical components in the organisms.

Besides this, the acceptance of the vital fluid theory led to two consequences: first, living


6/17

creatures could not have originated from inanimate substances (HULL, 1975, p. 176),

which created the problem of explaining how living beings came to be on the planet Earth;

and second, life cannot be created by man in a laboratory(HULL, 1975, p. 176).

The experiences of Urey and Miller (1976), even in contrast with Vitalism, also

cannot serve as proof that there is a pre-condition for the creation of life in the laboratory.

The findings of these experiences demonstrate the following premises: (1) all biochemical

reactions, in particular those that produce amino-acids and complex proteins can only

occur in a reductive atmosphere; (2) all oxidizing atmospheres provoke the immediate

destruction of the molecules, if they should appear; and (3) as a corollary of these

observations, it can be deduced that the Earths atmosphere in the Eon Arqueano Era

(3.600 million years MA to 2.500 MA Unesco/IUGS, 2000) must have been reductive;there is a general consensus in geological studies that it was like this.

Due to chemical requisites, Urey and Miller used the proposition of Oparin

(1924/1989) that the atmosphere would be a reducer with the following composition CH4,

H2O, NxO, H2, NH3, CO2 (4). Based on this proposition by Oparin, an experience was set

up in which these substances were placed in water and exposed to electric charges in

analogy with that which could happen in the atmosphere. The result was the appearance

of some less complex substances but of the organic type (5). These new substances wereinduced and put in evidence by the intervention of the researchers when they removed

minute quantities of the final substances from the reaction scene. This created a clear

means to overcome natural reversibility of the reaction so that: A + B C + D, which is a

condition for the non-perpetuation of the C and D phases, which are highly unstable ( 6).

The presence of man in this instance created a teleological inductor as an intervener,

since the pre-supposed randomness of the experiment was inhibited, whereby the initial

conditions of the first chemical steps in relation to the biochemical precursors of life weredisturbed.

However, even though the experience of Urey and Miller was successful because it

was the first synthesis of various typically organic substances, it was an alas; an

affirmation of the random direction of a possible synthesis event that the experiment

proposed to prove. This model still presents many problems in regards to the half-life of

the substances, such as how they arrived from the atmosphere to the oceans and got

dissolved in the water. The random notion is, for sure, weak under these circumstances


7/17

due to the fact that even though chemical reactions are random, the circumstances that

sustain the process may not be random. This fact creates a possible hypothesis that this

comes about through a series of fruitful favorable events, demonstrated by the simple fact

that we are alive here on Earth. How did this happen? Could it be the case in which

efficient causes were not only necessary, but also generated by biochemical and cellular

bases for life to exist? Vis a viz, the Panspermia Theory (HOYLE; WICKRAMASINGHE,

1992) counteracts the mechanical ideas of autochthonous lifes origin with some

unexpected evidence, i.e. amino-acids being found in meteorites (KVENVOLDEN;

LAWLESS; PONNAMPERUMA, 1971).

The main critics of the vitalist movement tend to explain the existence of lifes

organisms by mechanical and reduction approaches, e.g. Claude Bernard, who defendedthe idea that it is totally possible to explain organic phenomena through the future

development of physical chemistry (NASCIMENTO JUNIOR, 2001, p. 273; HULL, 1975, p.

173). If the physical project of Bernard were successful, it would be enough to site an

efficient case that explains the organic world, and the apparently teleological phenomena

would be nothing less than a result of the consequences of the initial event. One of the

worries of the critics of Vitalism, as well as the critics of any other biological theory that

admits teleology is a fundamental possibility, is that space cannot be opened to religious orspiritualistic theories that are not anchored to scientific bases and that deviate from

rigorous logic rules (MAYR, 2005; NASCIMENTO JUNIOR, 2001, p. 273-274).

The Vitalism Theory was discredited in that it presumes that a vital fluid exists.

However, this criticism led to the considerable reformation of this theory, becoming more

consistent, and as such, changed its denomination, now being called the Organism

Theory. The Organism Theory argues that life originated not from a vital fluid, but from a

vital force. In cases in which this force was considered as a variant of forces and energiesof the physical theory, it was discredited just as much as the vital fluid theory. Even so, the

variant that considered vital force as an emerging characteristic or property of a given

organization of certain material systems has gained significant force within the thoughts of

biologists until today. Notwithstanding, it is still a polemical issue when one considers that

it implies that distinct ontological levels need to be created for the appearance of the life

phenomenon (with distinct teleological characteristics of the mere physical phenomena)

and afterwards, maybe, also for their subjectivity (making conscientious teleology possible)


8/17

(HULL, 1975, p. 177-178). Obviously, all care should be taken before accepting or

rejecting some idea when practicing reductions, whereby there is the danger of attributing

levels of more complex orders as simple manifestations of the sum of less complex orders.

In the field of Historical Biology, the principal issue of this study is to investigate if

there exists, or not, some teleological command of nature for each species of living

creatures in its temporal evolution. Among the first thinkers, there was a significant

influence by the Hegel thesis because of its approach on historical and finalistic

development (NASCIMENTO JUNIOR, 2001, p. 273). A classic example of teleology

applied to a biological evolution theory is the Lamarck thesis where he proposes that

nature, a set of all living creatures, evolved through increasing degrees of complexity and

perfection along millions of years, arriving at its actual apex, which is the human being(FERREIRA, 2003; p. 86; SNCHEZ, 2006, p. 14). The explanation of Lamarck is clearly

teleological, but the question remains: does this direction continue for human beings?

Or better formulated at which point does the transaction from inanimate objects (logic of

being) to the logic of what should be (teleo-logic) occur?

This is what Charles Darwin sought to solve when he proposed his famous theory

about the mechanics of natural selection. According to this theory, the genealogy of living

creatures is affected by random mutations along the generations, and along their history;the most adapted to the environment will propagate (FERREIRA, 2003, p. 86). In this

manner, the objectives of living creatures, such as self-preservation and reproduction,

together with the efficacy and final desires of these, can be explained and could have

emerged in living creatures in a random manner and therefore influenced the perpetuation

of these species and this is ever more present in living creatures. Sanches (2006),

recollecting the text of Darwin, exposes:

The exclusive work of natural selection taking into consideration the conservation

and accumulations of variations that can be useful under the organic and inorganic

conditions that each living being is submitted to in its lifetime. The final results is

that every creature tends to perfect itself more and more in relation to the

conditions to which it is submitted (or has been submitted to) (SNCHEZ, 2006 p.

9)

This is the manner in which Darwin talks of natures unconscious teleology

(NASCIMENTO JUNIOR, 2001, p. 273), unending in relation to all that is natural

(SANCHEZ, 2006, p. 14), and that marks the passage of teleology (in a narrow sense) for


9/17

a type of teleonomy that would study the end of living creatures from their natural

evolutionary history; that is, encapsulated in an objective world without a final teleology in

the background (MORA, 2001, p. 2831). After evolutionary synthesis in the 1940s, the

teleonomy scenario of Evolutionary Biology is completed, if considering that the end of

living creatures is determined by species programming, in part forecasted by the genetic

code transmitted through generations and in part due to the continuous interaction effect of

the individual with its surroundings (this last is very noticeable in animals having a more

developed brain and nervous system) (MAYR, 2005, p. 72-73).

From the moment in which it was proposed by Darwin, the idea of natural evolution

was a great shock for the most diverse theories that defended the traditional universal

teleology and incarnate nature. An example, cited by Mayr, was the natural theory of theXVIII century:

The fact that all organisms appear to be perfectly adapted to one another and to

their surroundings was attributed by natural theologians to be the perfect design of

God. Darwin, however, demonstrated that it could also be explained, or maybe

even better explained by natural selection. This was the decisive refutation of the

cosmic teleological principle (MAYR, 2005, p. 48).

Finally, going back to the discussion on Functional Historical Biology, it is essential

to note that Darwin based his theory on living organisms and not on all the existing

physical objects in existence, and in doing so considered only a specific part of nature with

its ontology and teleology (more precisely as noted, teleonomy) of living creatures, in

consonance with this aspect of Vitalism. After analyzing the texts of Darwin, Collingwood

observed that the proposed evolutionary theory, in principal,

implies a philosophical conception of vital force, that is at the same time ingrained

and transcendent in relation to each of the living organisms; ingrained because its

existence is personalized in these organisms, and transcendent because it seeksnot only to perpetuate its own specific type and always trying to find, by itself, a

more adequate model of the same type. Under the philosophical plan, the

conception of vital process as different from mechanical or chemical

transformations revolutionizes the concept of nature (COLLINGWOOD, 1986 apud

NASCIMENTO JUNIOR, 2001, p. 273).

As much in evolutionist as in Vitalist-Organic Biology, there is a tendency to

completely negate cosmic teleology, although the teleology implicit for living creatures is

recognized, nested in a physical organization but implying nothing more than an


10/17

ontological step within the conceptions and explanations of the phenomena investigated.

For as much as it is polemic, the biological investigation relies as much on the strictly

casual mode of explanations as on the teleological explanations, without necessarily

contradicting one another, in search of creating a larger base of information and possible

clues to clarify organic phenomena (HULL, 1975, p. 171-172).

Notwithstanding, it is necessary to make an observation about the ontological

matter, after the appearance of modern science. While Ontology for Philosophy is

traditionally established in Metaphysics, in the epistemological field of science, Ontology

dissolves in specialist ontologies, even though this concept is not acceptable for many

scientists. It is difficult to negate that the science of Taxonomy is not an ontological science

strictu sensu. It acquired notable ontological boundaries in its subject of EvolutionaryPaleontology with its ample phylogenetic trees (cladograms described in tree format in

Phylogenetic Systematics).Hull recognizes that:

It is certainly true that nothing is more obvious in Nature than the existence of its

complexity and levels of its organization. [...] But the ontological levels: individuals,

parts, all, etc. can hardly be considered to be data about experience (Hull, 1975,

p. 180).

As can be seen, the theme of abstractions, approached by Marx and Weber inhuman sciences, is still a polemic issue within the Philosophy of Biology. Many scientists

cannot agree about the organism thinking procedure, since it is difficult to encounter

criteria on which to base the how, when and how many ontological levels should be

introduced.

2.2. Propositon for the Teleology x Randomness Problem

For sure the problems of randomness and teleology belong to the same structure of

theoretical thinking, as well as common intuitive thinking in everyday human life. Both are

teleological, each in its own manner, and because of this have consequences over the

thinking and world vision of the human beings.

In every natural system, events, facts, and processes occur that sometimes fit into

the teleological mode, other times in the random mode, as can be observed in the

perspective descriptions found in scientific literature. And this is inevitable due to the co-

existence of organic systems with inorganic systems; the first was easily approached from


11/17

a teleological perspective and those following were rarely teleological and tended to be

more or less teleomatic or random. However, the randomness notion can also make use of

randomness levels; that is, it can be at one level for short intervals, stochastic for medium

and long terms and almost deterministic during long intervals of time. An event of this type

could be connected to the chaos-deterministic processes.

The notion of teleology, itself, needs to be reviewed because it can generate

systems or conditions randomly or within the state of chaos. Notwithstanding, the

teleological and teleonomical orders are postulated from the surroundings in which, for all

aspects, the fact occurred randomly.

From the perspective of species evolution, the reproduction of living creatures can

be considered to be ruled by teleological systems that generate other teleological systemsand that species evolutions stems from random, stochastic and/or catastrophic events

(especially by catastrophic selection, LEWIS, 1962). However, this process permits

selection and induces mutation and adaptations that create new teleological systems. This

teleology is profoundly interlinked, given that the processes between organisms and their

surroundings are interactive.

The issue of the adaptive value of plant organs is seriously discussed by WILLIS

(1940) and is contrary to the adaptability idea of Darwin (1839). WILLIS really recognizessome aspects of the roots, trunks and leaves that are clearly functionalistic and finalistic,

while other taxonomic aspects evidence non-adaptable evolution, derived from clearly

random processes that generate mutations of the genome. This latter he could prove, for

example, with the Podostomaceae. The work of Willis is perhaps a precursor to the

movement denominated as cladist, in the 1980s (CRACRAFT; ELDREDGE, 1979), but

which actually began in 1956 in Germany, with the works of Hennig (1966) about

Systematic Phylogenetics. Under this focus, the evolvable lineages became much betterdesigned for phylogenetic trees, not by the neo-Darwinian method of the nexus ancestor-

descendent, but by the rate in which they shared the greatest number of mutual

characteristics. By this method, the issue of adaptation is surpassed by greater aspects,

such as the genomic, physiological and anatomical proximities. This applies as much for

Paleontology as for Neontology, in that they use the same hypothesis that infers fossil

function limitations in relationship with their living varieties.


12/17

It is clear that the teleological x randomness problem needs to be reviewed within

contemporary thinking of the Auto-organization Theory and/or the Auto-poiesis

(PRIGOGINE et al, 1989). In addition, this should be done following considerations that

raise old refrains, together with modern considerations, that more closely do justice to the

facts discussed nowadays by the scientific community.

3. Conclusions Teleology and the Environmental Sciences

Ecology and the other Environmental Sciences are related to the multi-disciplinary

study of the interaction of human beings with their physical and biotic surroundings. These

sciences share the common goal of studying how to maintain the survival processes ofliving creatures. Within these studies, it is common for a scientist to apply various

teleological concepts. By referring to the various significant hues of these concepts

covered in this article, it is believable that the significance of teleology in environmental

studies is not always clearly defined. The reflections in this text aim to demonstrate that

in principle, such hues are difficult to characterize, but that they are necessary for

proficient scientific development, and need to be introduced with great care and rigor,

mainly in researches of the environmental spectrum. Furthermore, consideration should begiven to the point that, mixed with the studied teleological processes, underlies the roles,

objectives and personal values of the scientist, who usually also desires the preservation

of living creatures, or at least the preservation and improvement of the quality of human

life.

Note that in environmental studies, it is common to deal with conscientious and

proposed teleology (as in humans and superior mammals) alongside with referential

aspects, apparently more circumscriptive teleonomics, such as bacterial and microscopicorganisms. However, all of the involved living processes within the structure of the

evolvable theory are under the strong influence of a selective and unending process, in the

Darwinian approach. There are no clear boundary lines between which phenomena should

be studied or what their teleological significance is. The question is: At what stage of living

creature evolution did the conscience appear? And at what stage does it pass from being

a simple chemically organic reaction to become an end process, set by the living character


13/17

itself? Can the end goals of human beings be compared to those of bacteria without

remitting to gross comparisons and divisions?

Added to these are the studies about physical systems (geological, marine,

atmospheric, etc.) in their geological processes, considering their structural, dynamic or

energetic stability. In these cases, teleology is only an evolvable and operational tendency,

but maintains regularity in different time scales, even not having a specific reason to exist.

However, these chaotic-deterministic phenomena affect biotic teleonomies and teleologies.

Thus what seems to be a simple teleology or teleomatism, acquires much more complex

context when studying these stabilities in ecosystems, in the biosphere and even the entire

planet Earth. Could it be that a system (physical, biological or mixed) could desire its own

stability, and in doing so, create a new level of ontology? The internal teleology of eachliving creature then passes to the new level of teleology encompassing communities,

systems and other sets of entities.

Propositions for theories with a strong tendency towards total or cosmic teleology

are becoming more common. As an example, there is the Gaia Hypothesis (of an

intelligent planet with teleological behavior). There are also various spiritualistic-

ecological streams of thought that try to conciliate conservative teleology with wider

finalistic aspects. Referring to these latter tendencies, regardless of their efficiency orintellectual fertileness, their arguments should not stem from confusing and little defined

conceptions of teleology because this could lead to faulty reasoning and in doing so,

generate incredibility within the traditional academic community.

Referncias Bibliogrficas

ATLAN, Henry. As Finalidades Inconscientes. In: THOMPSON, William Irwin (org.) Gaia:

uma teoria do conhecimento. Traduo Slvio Cerqueira Leite. So Paulo: Ed. Gaia, 2001.

BERTEN, Andr. Crtica da Racionalidade Contempornea. Notas. Belo Horizonte: Ed.UFMG, 2005

BERTEN, Andr. Filosofia Social: a responsabilidade social do filsofo. Trad. MrcioAnatole de Souza Romeiro, So Paulo: Ed. Paulus, 2004.


14/17

COLLINGWOOD, R.G. Cincia e filosofia: a idia da Natureza. Lisboa: Editorial Presena.1986.

CRACRAFT, J.; ELDREDGE, N. Phylogentic Analysis and Paleontology. New York:Columbia University Press, 1979.

DARWIN, Charles. The Voyage of the Beagle. 1839. Washington, D.C.: NationalGeographic Classics, 2004.

FERREIRA, A. B. de H. Novo Dicionrio Aurlio da Lngua Portuguesa. 2 ediorevisada e ampliada. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Nova Fronteira, 1986.

FERREIRA, M. A.. A Teleologia na Biologia Contempornea. Revista Scientiae Studia,FFLCH, USP, v. 1, n. 2, p.154, abr.-jun. 2003

Hennig, W. 1965. Phylogenetic Systematics.Ann. Rev. Entomol. 10, 97-116

HOYLE, Fred; WICKRAMASINGHE, Chandra. Fuerza vital csmica La energa de lavida por el universo. Mxico D. F.: Fondo de Cultura Econmica.[s.d]

HULL, David. Filosofia da Cincia Biolgica. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Zahar, 1975.

KVENVOLDEN, Keith A.; LAWLESS, James G.; PONNAMPERUMA, Cyril. NonproteinAmino Acids in the Murchison Meteorite. Proceedings of the National Academy of

Sciences. v. 68. n. 2, p. 486-490, february.1971.

LEWIS, H. Catastrophic Selection as a factor inspeciation. EVOLUTION. v.XVI. n.2,p.257-271.1962

MAYR, Ernst. Biologia, Cincia nica. So Paulo: Companhia das Letras, , 2005.

MATURANA, H. Y Varela, F. El rbol del conocimiento. Santiago: Ed. Universitaria,Chile, 1984.


15/17

MILLER, Stanley L.; UREY, Harold C.; OR J.. Origin of organic compounds on theprimitive earth and in meteorites. Journal of Molecular Evolution. v.9. n. 1, p. 59-72.

march, 1976.

MORA, J. Ferrater. Dicionrio de Filosofia. So Paulo: Ed. Loyola, 2001.

NASCIMENTO Junior, A. F. Fragmentos da Presena do Pensamento Idealista na Histriada Construo das Cincias da Natureza. Revista Cincia & Educao, v.7, n.2, p.265-285, 2001.

NASCIMENTO Junior, A. F. Fragmentos da Presena do Pensamento Dialtico na Histriada Construo das Cincias da Natureza. Revista Cincia & Educao, v. 6, n. 2, p. 119-139, 2000.

OPARIN, A. I. A origem da vida. So Paulo: Global, 1982.

PASCAL, G. O Pensamento de Kant. Rio de Janeiro: Ed. Vozes, 2001.

PRIGOGINE, I., STANGERS, I. La Nouvelle Aliance. Mtamorphose de la Science.Paris: Gallimard, 1979.

PRIGOGINE, I., STANGERS, I. Entre le Temps et l ternit. Paris: Fayard, 1988.

SNCHEZ, Antnio Leon. Los problemas de la Evolucion II: El Darwinismo. Curso deDoctorado, Departamento de Antropologa, Lgica y Filosofa de la Cincia, Facultad deFilosofa. UNED. Madrid, Disponvel em http://www.terra.es/personal4/pjournal/,Acessoem: junho de 2006.

UNESCO / IUGS. Explanatory note to the International Stratigraphic Chart. Division ofEarth Sciences UNESCO. 2000
http://www.terra.es/personal4/pjournal/http://www.terra.es/personal4/pjournal/


16/17

VILLA, Mariano Moreno (coord.) Dicionrio de Pensamento Contemporneo. SoPaulo: Ed. Paulus, 2000.

WILLIS JC 1940. The Course of Evolution by Differentiation or Divergent MutationRather Than By Selection. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1974, Facsimile byHafner Press, New York, USA, 207 p.


17/17

Documents

Teleology and Randomness in the Development of Natural Science Research: Systems, Ontology and Evolution