5
votes
Are only human beings capable of rationally intentional acts?
Long story short
This is evidently false. As it is discussed whether great apes can work towards shared ends, it is quite obvious that intentionality is seen as a given. Some animals can utilise ...
- 14.8k
3
votes
What is a "disorder"?
I'm not sure why you are disposing of teleology. We may not be able to derive an 'ought' from an 'is', but that doesn't mean that 'oughts' don't exist. If we have a car, there's nothing problematic in ...
- 24.2k
3
votes
Accepted
Can a moral theory be eudaemonological but not teleological?
Eudaimonia is translated by many modern scholars now as human-flourishing instead of happiness, or the literal translation of good-spiritedness. Aristotle studied medicine with his father, and spent ...
- 23.8k
3
votes
Accepted
Aristotle's middle point between teleological eliminativists and teleological intentionalists
Aristotle's ideas about final causation apply to all organisms. The basic notions are those of a nature (phusis) and a potential for change (dunamis).
For instance, an acorn has a nature (phusis), ...
- 36.1k
3
votes
Can purpose be attributed to events without grounding in agency
Humans have the ability to fantasise and/or rationalise meanings quite well
Humans are pattern-seeking animals. We seek to understand what goes on around us. Seeing a pattern — of the sort: "if this, ...
- 5,229
3
votes
Can purpose be attributed to events without grounding in agency
To answer the title question:
Can purpose be attributed to events without grounding in agency?
Yes. There are several examples:
Daniel Dennett in several of his lectures explains how nature ...
- 27.9k
3
votes
Accepted
Why is deontological ethics the opposite of teleological ethics and not "ontological" ethics
They are not "opposites". They approach ethics from different lenses.
Also, ontology is:
the philosophical study of being ... ontology examines what all entities have in common and how they ...
- 13.8k
3
votes
Why is deontological ethics the opposite of teleological ethics and not "ontological" ethics
Well, no one knows philosophical nomenclature better than philosophers, so you're asking a good question.
You ask:
Why is deontological ethics the opposite of teleological ethics and not "...
- 35.6k
2
votes
The perverted faculty argument
An answer to your specifically stated question:
Yes, the distinction is meaningful. But it has to be understood within the context of the specific faculty, agent, and end. If you hold that sexual ...
- 171
2
votes
The perverted faculty argument
" “contrary to” and “other than” "
Surely ig0774 is correct. That something is, or can be, contrary to an aim, is an uncomplicated idea, and free of difficulty. Aristotle spoke of people who ...
- 383
2
votes
Accepted
A simple mathematical example for pseudo-teleology
An ancient example comes from optics, on the path taken by a ray of light reflecting from a mirror.
The analogy to Newton's Laws, the "instantaneous" law, is the statement that the angle of incidence ...
- 228
2
votes
Moral nihilism & teleology
Welcome, Matthew. I think some clarification of concepts would help answer your questions.
Moral nihilism is the view that nothing is valuable, there are no binding moral norms, and nothing is worth ...
- 36.1k
2
votes
What is a "disorder"?
Answer
Your question is a good one, and you of course see the normative element inherent in using language to specify what a 'disorder' is, particularly from the domain of abnormal psychology. I'll ...
- 35.6k
2
votes
What is a "disorder"?
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has an interesting article on what mental health, including a sections dealing with what "disorder" means. It is definitely worth a careful read since ...
- 1,113
2
votes
What is the difference between control exerted by an agent and causation?
Short Answer
What is the difference between control and causation?
Yes, philosophy is well established if you phrase the question correctly. Control is a type of causation. As for how does the mind ...
- 35.6k
1
vote
What is the difference between control exerted by an agent and causation?
In causal reasoning, the energy required to explain an effect does not need to come from the cause.
As an example, automatic umbrellas are opened by pressing a button with a finger. The energy ...
- 7,417
1
vote
What's the difference between teleology and teleonomy?
I assume Monod chose a different term here in order to make clear that there actually is something that appears to us as purposefulness instilled in living organisms through evolution, namely that ...
- 14.8k
1
vote
What is the difference between anti-teleology and deontology?
The difference is simple.
Ethical positions that evaluate the consequences of action which determine right and wrong are considered teleological. Ethical positions that hold that there is a duty to ...
- 35.6k
1
vote
Natural purposes vs. right actions
The question seems to follow old arguments on natural law (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_law), that if we can identify the proper purpose of organs as god has given to use, it is wrong to use ...
- 7,417
1
vote
What is the difference between control exerted by an agent and causation?
The former control system engineer philosophizes thus:
Causation simply means that if A happens, then the outcome will be B. A tree is struck by lightning, then its bark explodes off the trunk. If the ...
- 9,392
1
vote
What is a "disorder"?
The is-ought gap describes that moral rules cannot be inferred from natural states. As an example, homosexuality cannot be considered immoral just because it is a property of a minority and does not ...
- 7,417
1
vote
What is a "disorder"?
Disclaimer: this follows the perspective of the Systems Theory, and this is a personal interpretation I use, which shows useful in some systemic applications.
Before: remark that a system is a set of ...
- 8,120
1
vote
Bayesian reasoning regarding perceived unlikely outcomes
TLDR: It depends on the prior probabilty you assign to the proposition that the dealer is stacking the deck in your favor, and to the conditional probability of being dealt a royal flush given that ...
- 3,904
1
vote
Bayesian reasoning regarding perceived unlikely outcomes
The short answer is that you can't tell, because you are working from a single data point. For all you know, the dealer has dealt hundreds of thousands of hands and you just happened along at a ...
- 31.5k
1
vote
Accepted
Marx and teleology : what has happened, what will happen, or what could happen?
Marx's economic determinism includes an element of teleology, rooted in his conception of human nature. You ask whether Marx's view of history is solely about what has come into being; or, whether it ...
- 36.1k
1
vote
If purpose is just another side of cause, is everyone a consequentialist?
Purpose is just another side of cause. This is what I take as a premise. One might change "cause" by "reason" sometimes, both are related.
Those terms don't get used the same way.
At the same time ...
- 1,915
1
vote
Can purpose be attributed to events without grounding in agency
I think you are conflating two uses of the word purpose. One use refers to an intention. For example, you might say that my purpose in typing this answer was to exercise my mind to distract it from ...
- 26.4k
1
vote
Can purpose be attributed to events without grounding in agency
Having agent causation allows what we are trying to explain to have a final cause or purpose or intention. It conflicts with causal determinism, but this would allow something to have meaning. https:...
- 19.8k
1
vote
Is there teleology in (modern) science?
Yes. There appears to be a consensus around teleology being present in the understanding of black holes. Checking for "teleology" in the arxiv might be illuminating and also remembering that until ...
- 3,734
Only top scored, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible