Teleology

Costa Rica-Facebook

Teleology 

Teleology is a philosophical doctrine that all nature, 'or at least intentional agents, are goal-directed or functionally organised'. Hull (1996: 791). Plato suggested that the organised world/universe could be understood by comparing it to the behaviour of organised agents. Hull (1996: 791). This was known as 'external teleology'. Hull (1996: 791). Human beings could anticipate their future and plan accordingly. Hull (1996: 791).

Persons could calculate their own futures, so to speak.

Aristotle held to 'internal teleology' as in 'invested nature itself with goals'. Hull (1996: 791).

Each of these has their own final cause with the entities being constructed in a way that they tend to meet their directed goal. Hull (1996: 791).

Natural theology from theologians and philosophers took these concepts and supposed that the 'all-powerful God' was to fulfill his divine intentions. Hull (1996: 791).

Today philosophers may acknowledge apparent 'functional organization' in reality, but attempt to not reference the supernatural. Hull (1996: 791).

In other words to not reference, God or angelic beings. Naturalistic references and preferences would be used.

The views of Plato and Aristotle seem over-speculative, as in a finite being cannot safely and fully accurately predict the teleological pattern for self, or teleology for self because of lack of knowledge and because human beings are a secondary cause of thoughts, acts and actions. God would be the first and primary cause of all things being the infinite, first cause.

Only God could determine teleology in a full sense.

In regard to the related teleological argument, it is not the purpose of this article.

But when reviewing various arguments over the years under the headings of 'natural theology' some of the premises do at times seem to be over-speculative and views that could be easily endlessly challenged by theists and non-theists.

I therefore have not used them online or offline.

In other words, how provable are the premises and conclusions philosophically and theologically?

I instead do hold to the concept of first cause and reason it is consistent, although not identical to the concept of the creator Biblical God. First cause being primarily of philosophy and philosophy of religion; God, primarily being of theology and Bible.

As I studied Alvin C. Plantinga's book 'God, Freedom and Evil' very thoroughly for my theses work, there was a section on Natural Theology and he largely dismissed concepts related to the teleological argument as not having evidence with points 2 to 6. Plantinga (1977)(2002: 84). In contrast, R. Douglas Geivett was much more positive in regard to natural theology in 'Evil and the Evidence for God'. Plantinga's views and his dismissal assuredly largely debatable and controversial.

I lean more towards the views of Geivett in favour of at least some significant usefulness for natural theology, philosophical theology and philosophy of religion from a Christian perspective, but again acknowledge the speculative nature.

In the Scripture from the Hebrew Bible and Old Testament to Revelation it can be seen and understood though that God does have teleology in play. God has a teleological purpose in creating angelic beings, human beings, in the fall, problem evil, the gospel and in the restoration of the universe.

From a finite human perspective while admitting that all truth is God's truth, in regard to God, it is more reliable depending on revelation and reason than philosophical speculation and reason.

GEIVETT, R. DOUGLAS (1993) Evil and the Evidence for God, Philadelphia, Temple University Press.

HULL, DAVID, L (1996) ‘Teleology’, in Robert Audi, (ed), The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

PLANTINGA, ALVIN C. (1977)(2002) God, Freedom, and Evil, Grand Rapids, Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.