Dear Roger and everyone,
My "Re: creationism" post of yesterday should have been directed
specifically to several other people besides the ones mentioned
(Erin, Squonk, Scott etc.) but especially to Roger.
Roger has been the one to focus the discussion on the teleological
aspect. I think that he reveals a problem in defining what teleology
really is. The issue is that we use many words that may, or may not have
teleological connotations:
Cause, the driving force vs. cause, the principle
Purpose, the use vs. purpose, the aspiration
Determination, that defines how things behave vs. determination that
drives people to their goals
I call this "The Purpose Platypus" (see archives Sept. 1998).
My question to everyone: Does teleology have a purpose?
Jonathan
MOQ.ORG - http://www.moq.org
Mail Archive - http://alt.venus.co.uk/hypermail/moq_discuss/
MD Queries - horse@darkstar.uk.net
To unsubscribe from moq_discuss follow the instructions at:
http://www.moq.org/md/subscribe.html
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sat Aug 17 2002 - 16:02:29 BST