[Taxacom] teleology example

[John Grehan]

I have no objection to scientists viewing purpose as a causal explanation
so long as it is not represented as a scientific methodology where they are
not just problematic, but uninformative and untestable. If David Winter
said, for example, that it was his personal belief that purpose was the
driver behind this or that adaptation then one could just accept that as
his personal belief and something that had no scientific merit since it
would just be a position that lay outside the boundaries and capabilities
of science - just as intelligent design theory does. Teilhard did propose a
teleological perspective for evolution, but I also do not know if he
applied that to technical papers.

John Grehan

On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 5:24 PM, Jim Betts <jimbetts at xtra.co.nz> wrote:

> In a properly rigorous argument, there shouldn't be recourse to teleology.
> We probably all think teleologically sometimes, & mostly this is inocuous.
> Is a properly constructed argument, any apparent or residual teleology
> should be reframed, even if the explanation is longer.
> It will be longer, but will have more weight, as oppesed to zero weight.
> If the teleology can't be reframed, then the thought expressed has a flaw,
> or else we are at the limits of science.
>
> Systematic attempts to import teleology are interesting but problematic.
> Pierre Teilhard de Chardin died in 1955.
> I don't know if he used teleological explanations in his purely technical
> papers.
>
> There is a parallel with computers.
> When someone says: <<The computer won't let me do that>>.
> Obviously the computer has no opinion or intention.
> But we understand what the speaker means.
> A more precise description of the process is available - and is necessary
> - in the proper literature.
>
> (Jim Betts)
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John Grehan" <calabar.john at gmail.com>
> To: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, March 07, 2013 3:12 PM
> Subject: [Taxacom] teleology example
>
>
> At various times I have raised, in this and other lists, the continued
> presence of intelligent design theology in science in the form of explicit
> teleology. Often the response is "that is not what they really intended".
> Here's a nice explicit example: "it’s hard to see how these hair-like
> processes would evolve if they didn’t serve a purpose." This from David
> Winter, "a PhD student in evolutionary genetics who very occasionally
> thinks he has something that the internet simply needs to know…" See
> http://sciblogs.co.nz/the-atavism/tag/new-zealand/
>
> John Grehan
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
> signature database 8087 (20130307) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus
> signature database 8087 (20130307) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET Smart Security.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched with either of these
> methods:
>
> (1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
> Celebrating 26 years of Taxacom in 2013.
>