Teleology is, according to Merriam-Webster, "the fact or character attributed to nature or natural processes of being directed toward an end or shaped by a purpose."A couple words come to mind when I read this particular definition: destiny and predestination.
The Existentialists would hate this.
Jean-Paul Sartre, through Nausea, states that things don't come in pre-made categories. This flies in the face of teleology, which pretty much says that we're being directed to an already-decided purpose or end.
Furthermore, because things don't come in already-determined, already-defined categories, this essence of a thing is meaningless: what matters is that it simply IS (like I mentioned on Tuesday, what matters is not that a cactus is spiny, but that there is a cactus to begin with). Sartre subsequently turns "essence precedes existence" upside down and instead declares that "existence precedes essence," since in order to have an essence a thing must already exist.
Now, since the sole existence of things is all that matters, once one realizes this they become wholly, really free. Because any meaning a thing might have (like social and cultural constructs) comes solely from our actions, we realize we can be anything we want to be. (But wait! This doesn't mean you can be a Hedonist and just get away with it! Because you have absolute freedom, according to Sartre (and other Existentialists), you also have absolute responsibility. Isn't that less fun!)
Back to teleology-- if our social and cultural surroundings don't really have any meaning, any bearing on us and who we are, and since then we can be anything we choose to be, then we don't have to follow a predetermined, natural process toward some end. The handsome young prince DOESN'T have to go wake up Sleeping Beauty, and can instead spend his days in the pub after fighting dragons.
I like that ending better anyway.
The Existentialists would hate this.
Jean-Paul Sartre, through Nausea, states that things don't come in pre-made categories. This flies in the face of teleology, which pretty much says that we're being directed to an already-decided purpose or end.
Furthermore, because things don't come in already-determined, already-defined categories, this essence of a thing is meaningless: what matters is that it simply IS (like I mentioned on Tuesday, what matters is not that a cactus is spiny, but that there is a cactus to begin with). Sartre subsequently turns "essence precedes existence" upside down and instead declares that "existence precedes essence," since in order to have an essence a thing must already exist.
Now, since the sole existence of things is all that matters, once one realizes this they become wholly, really free. Because any meaning a thing might have (like social and cultural constructs) comes solely from our actions, we realize we can be anything we want to be. (But wait! This doesn't mean you can be a Hedonist and just get away with it! Because you have absolute freedom, according to Sartre (and other Existentialists), you also have absolute responsibility. Isn't that less fun!)
Back to teleology-- if our social and cultural surroundings don't really have any meaning, any bearing on us and who we are, and since then we can be anything we choose to be, then we don't have to follow a predetermined, natural process toward some end. The handsome young prince DOESN'T have to go wake up Sleeping Beauty, and can instead spend his days in the pub after fighting dragons.
I like that ending better anyway.
