The Effects of Aristotelian Teleological Thought on Darwins Mechanisti

The Effects of Aristotelian Teleological Thought on Darwins Mechanistic Views of Evolution     The fatality to derive organisms has been a much sought goal ofscience since its birth as biology. History shows Aristotle and Charles Darwinas two of the most powerful biologists of all time. Aristotles teleologicalmethod was supported widely for over 2,000 years. One scientist remarks thatthe Aristotelian teleology "has been the ghost, the unexplained mystery whichhas haunted biology through its whole history" (Ayala, 10). If Aristotlesapproach has panicked biology, then Darwin, who actually nicknamed himselfthe "Devils Chaplain," and his idea of subjective selection has virtually dissectedAristotles ghost. While Aristotle explained biology through a plan and apurpose, Darwin debated that randomness and pandemonium are responsible for theorganic world as we know it. Guiseppe Montalenti, an Italian geneticist andphilosopher of biology, wrote that Da rwins ideas were a rebellion againstthought in the Aristotelian-scholastic way (Ayala, 4). In order tounderstand how Darwinism can 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 watch the plan adopted by mathematicians in theirdemonstrations of astronomy, and after weighing the phenomena presented byanimals, and their several move, follow consequently to understand the causesand the end results. Using this method, Aristotle constructed causes for bodyparts and processes of the human body, such as sundry types of teeth.Aristotle elucidated on this topic "When we have ascertained the thingsexistence we inquire as to its naturewhen we know the fact we take aim the reason"(Evans, 82).     Despite Aristotles frequent teleological ex planations, he did warnagainst teleology leading to misinterpretations of facts. In a short writing onthe reproduction of bees in times 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 century 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 inrapidly changing environments (Mayr, 43).ReferencesAristotle. The Works of Aristotle, Encyclopedia Britannica. New York, 1952Ayala, F.J. and Tobzharsky, T. Studies in the ism of Biology.University of California Press. Berkeley and Los Angeles. 1974.Burrow, John. Editor introduction to Charles Darwins Origin of the Species Penguin 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.