In a message dated 7/30/02 12:05:41 PM GMT Daylight Time,
jonathan.marder@newmail.net writes:
> 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
>
Hi Jonathan,
Teleology is the potential that actuality fulfils.
It is the potential of an Oak seed to grow into a mature tree.
It is the potential of all things to reach their best.
So, teleology is a migration towards quality.
All the, errrr, best,
Squonk.
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