The Effects of Aristotelian Teleological Thought on Darwins Mechanisti

The Effects of Aristotelian Teleological Thought on Darwins mechanistic Views of Evolution     The need to understand organisms has been a much sought mark ofscience since its birth as biology. History shows Aristotle and Charles Darwinas two of the virtually powerful biologists of all time. Aristotles teleologicalmethod was supported widely for all over 2,000 years. One scientist remarks thatthe Aristotelian teleology "has been the ghost, the unexplained mystery whichhas haunted biology done its whole history" (Ayala, 10). If Aristotlesapproach has frightened biology, then Darwin, who actually nicknamed himselfthe "Devils Chaplain," and his root of intrinsic selection has virtually dissectedAristotles ghost. While Aristotle explained biology finished a plan and apurpose, Darwin debated that randomness and chaos are prudent for theorganic world as we fuck it. Guiseppe Montalenti, an Italian geneticist andphilosopher of biology, wrote that Darwins ideas were a disintegration againstthought in the Aristotelian-scholastic way (Ayala, 4). In order tounderstand how Darwinism nominate be considered a revolt against Aristotle, we mustfirst inspect Aristotles ideas and thoughts about biology.Aristotle used teleology to explain the harmony and final results of theearth. Teleology is the study of the purpose of nature. Aristotle believedthat scientists should go along the plan adopted by mathematicians in theirdemonstrations of astronomy, and after weighing the phenomena presented byanimals, and their several parts, follow consequently to understand the causesand the end results. Using this method, Aristotle constructed causes for torsoparts and processes of the human body, such as sundry types of teeth.Aristotle elucidated on this take "When we have ascertained the thingsexistence we inquire as to its naturewhen we know the fact we ask the reason"(Evans, 82).     Despite Aristotles frequent teleological explanations, he did warnagainst teleology leading to misinterpretations of facts. In a short writing onthe reproduction of bees in Generation of Animals, Aristotle was troubled thatthere were insufficient observations on the subject, and warns that his theoryis dependent on facts supporting the theory. One twentieth vitamin C biologist... ... to describe evolutionteleologically. This proof, of course, is not possible, as evolution throughnatural selection cannot be described as goal-oriented since it happens due toprevious events or transformations, not in anticipation of coming events. If wewere goal-oriented, natural selection would not be supple enough to be useful in rapidly changing environments (Mayr, 43).ReferencesAristotle. The Works of Aristotle, Encyclopedia Britannica. New York, 1952Ayala, F.J. and Tobzharsky, T. Studies in the Philosophy of Biology.University of atomic number 20 Press. Berkeley and Los Angeles. 1974.Burrow, John. Editor introduction to C harles Darwins Origin of the SpeciesPenguin books. England, 1968.Evans, G. The Physical Philosophy of Aristotle. University of New MexicoPress. Albuquerque, 1964.Kirk, G., Raven, J. and Schofield, M. The presocratic Philosophers. CambridgeUniversity Press. Cambridge. 1983.Mayr, Ernst. Toward a New Philosophy of Biology. Harvard University Press.1988.Moore, Ruth. Evolution. Time-life books. Alexandria, Virginia. 1980.Simpson, George The Meaning of Evolution. Yale University Press. New Havenand London. 1949.