01.05.2013 Views

KANT'S CRITIQUE OF TELEOLOGY IN BIOLOGICAL EXPLANATION

KANT'S CRITIQUE OF TELEOLOGY IN BIOLOGICAL EXPLANATION

KANT'S CRITIQUE OF TELEOLOGY IN BIOLOGICAL EXPLANATION

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Teleological Maxims 51<br />

this kind of efficient causality forces us to employ certain ideas or<br />

representations as cognitive means. 34<br />

Teleological Maxims<br />

In the last three sections of the Analytic (§§66-68) Kant makes<br />

a virtue of necessity. Since in the case of inner purposiveness, we<br />

have to make use of teleological expressions, that is, since in science<br />

we cannot get by without them, we ought then to squeeze as much<br />

out of these principles as we can — but only as heuristic maxims.<br />

Thus, even in instances where we do not need to employ teleological<br />

principles, we should feel free to use them to help pick up the traces<br />

of mechanism. For instance, when examining a natural purpose<br />

that one can only conceive as embodying a means-and-end relation,<br />

one ought to consider all parts of it as possible only according to the<br />

concept of purpose, even such parts as could otherwise be explained<br />

in a purely mechanistic fashion such as bones, hair and skin etc.<br />

That is, even the parts that one could explain according to empirical<br />

laws should also be considered from a functional point of view (§66).<br />

Furthermore, nature as a whole should be judged as a system of<br />

relative purposes without of course establishing a hierarchy of such<br />

purposes and enthroning one of them as the ultimate purpose of<br />

nature. In modern terms, one should consider things in their ecological<br />

connections — whether they are "purposive" for other things<br />

and whether other things are "purposive" for them. It is thus possible<br />

and perhaps useful to consider nature not just as a system of<br />

causal laws but also as a system of purposive relations (§67).<br />

Finally, Kant emphasizes (§68) that in spite of its usefulness<br />

teleology is not an intrinsic principle of natural science but rather is<br />

"borrowed" from outside. Teleological principles are only regulative<br />

and themselves have no explanatory value, even though they may<br />

help us to find explanations. Explanations are mechanistic: in an<br />

experiment the phenomenon to be explained is produced according<br />

to known empirical laws: "for we have complete insight only into<br />

what we can ourselves make and accomplish according to concepts"<br />

(B309; CJ, 264).<br />

34 This point especially is emphasized by Jacob, Logic of Life, pp. 88-89.

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!