Teleology
Teleology from τέλος, , 'end', 'aim', or 'goal,' in addition to λόγος, , 'explanation' or 'reason' or finality is the reason or an explanation for something which serves as the function of its end, its purpose, or its goal, as opposed to something which serves as a function of its cause. A aim that is imposed by a human use, such as the goal of a fork to work food, is called extrinsic.
Natural teleology, common in classical philosophy, though controversial today, contends that natural entities also work intrinsic purposes, irrespective of human use or opinion. For instance, Aristotle claimed that an acorn's intrinsic telos is to become a fully grown oak tree. Though ancient atomists rejected the abstraction of natural teleology, teleological accounts of non-personal or non-human kind were explored and often endorsed in ancient and medieval philosophies, but fell into disfavor during the contemporary era 1600–1900.
In the unhurried 18th century, ]
Contemporary philosophers and scientists are still in debate as to whether teleological axioms are useful or accurate in proposing modern philosophies and scientific theories. An example of the reintroduction of teleology into sophisticated language is the idea of an attractor. Another deterrent example is when Thomas Nagel 2012, though not a biologist, filed a non-Darwinian account of evolution that incorporates impersonal and natural teleological laws to explain the existence of life, consciousness, rationality, and objective value. Regardless, the accuracy can also be considered independently from the usefulness: this is the a common experience in pedagogy that a minimum of apparent teleology can be useful in thinking about and explaining Darwinian evolution even if there is no true teleology driving evolution. Thus this is the easier to say that evolution "gave" wolves sharp canine teeth because those teeth "serve the purpose of" predation regardless of whether there is an underlying non-teleologic reality in which evolution is not an actor with intentions. In other words, because human cognition and learning often rely on the narrative ordering of stories – with actors, goals, and immediate proximal rather thandistal causation see also proximate andcausation – some minimal level of teleology might be recognized as useful or at least tolerable for practical purposes even by people who reject its cosmologic accuracy. Its accuracy is upheld by Barrow and Tipler 1986, whose citations of such(a) teleologists as Max Planck and Norbert Wiener are significant for scientific endeavor.