Abstract
The word “teleonomy” has been proposed to refer to the study of goal-directed processes without the encumbrances of teleological explanations. Those who have proposed the new term have disagreed about which of the encumbrances of teleological thought they were seeking to avoid. Various biological authors have sought to attach the concept of teleonomy to particular explanatory systems, such as natural selection or cybernetics. But in so doing they have reinstituted the most crippling weakness of teleological thought: the failure to provide a definition independent of explanation by which goal-directed processes may be identified. Any attempt to attach teleonomy to a particular explanatory system prevents its use for a more important purpose, to provide a concept by which to refer to organization in nature without prejudice to the manner in which that organization is to be explained. The availability of such a concept would be useful in avoiding patterns of circular thought, which are all too familiar in the behavioral and biological sciences.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Curio, E. (1973). Towards a methodology of teleonomy. Experientia 29:1045–1058.
Hailman, J. (1982). Evolution and behavior: An iconoclastic view. In Plotkin, H. C. (ed.), Learning, Development and Culture ,Wiley, New York, pp. 205–254.
Hamilton, W. D. (1964). The genetical theory of social behaviour, I, II. J. Theor. Biol. 7:1–52.
Hofstadter, A. (1941). Objective teleology. J. Philos. 38:29–56.
Huxley, J. (1960). The Openbill’s open bill: A teleonomic enquiry. Zool. Jahrb. 80:9–29.
Lorenz, K., and Tinbergen, N. (1938). Taxis and instinct. In Schiller, C. H. (ed.), Instinctive Behavior ,International Universities Press, pp. 176–208.
MacCorquodale, K., and Meel, P. E. (1948). On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables. Psychol. Rev. 1948:54–55.
Mayr, E. (1961). Cause and effect in biology. Science 134:1501–1506.
Mayr, E. (1982). Teleological and teleonomic: A new analysis. In Plotkin, H. C. (ed.), Learning, Development and Culture ,Wiley, New York, pp. 17–38.
Paterson, H. E. H. (1978). More evidence against speciation by reinforcement. S. Afr. J. Sci. 74:369–371.
Paterson, H. E. H. (1980). A comment on ‘mate recognition systems.’ Evolution 34:330–331.
Paterson, H. E. H. (1982). Perspective on speciation by reinforcement. S. Afr. J. Sci. 78:53–57.
Perry, R. B. (1918). Docility and purposiveness. Psychol. Rev. 25:1.
Perry, R. B. (1921). A behavioristic view of purpose. J. Philos. 18:4.
Pittendrigh, C. S. (1958). Adaptation, natural selection and behavior. In Roe, A., and Simpson, G. G. (eds.), Behavior and Evolution ,Yale University Press, New Haven, Connecticut, pp. 390–419.
Ritchie, B. F. (1973). Theories of learning: A consumer report. In Wolman, B. B. (ed.), Handbook of General Psychology ,Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, pp. 451–460.
Thompson, N. S. (1981). Toward a falsifiable theory of evolution. In Bateson, P. P. G., and Klopfer, P. H. (eds.), Perspectives in Ethology ,Vol. 4, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 51–73.
Thompson, N. S. (1985). Deception and the concept of behavioral design. In Mitchell, R. W., and Thompson, N. S. (eds.), Deception: Perspectives on Human and Nonhuman Deceit ,State University of New York Press, New York, pp. 53–65.
Tinbergen, N., and Kuenen, D. J. (1939). Feeding behavior in young thrushes. In Schiller, C. H. (ed.), Instinctive Behavior ,International Universities Press, pp. 209–238.
Tolman, E. C. (1951a). A new formula for behaviorism [1922]. In Tolman, E. C. (ed.), Collected Papers in Psychology ,University of California Press, pp. 1–8.
Tolman, E. C. (1951b). Behaviorism and purpose [1925]. In Tolman, E. C. (ed.), Collected Papers in Psychology ,University of California Press, pp. 32–37.
Williams, G. C. (1966). Adaptation and Natural Selection: A Critique of Some Current Evolutionary Thought ,Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1987 Plenum Press, New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Thompson, N.S. (1987). The Misappropriation of Teleonomy. In: Bateson, P.P.G., Klopfer, P.H. (eds) Perspectives in Ethology. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1815-6_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-1815-6_10
Publisher Name: Springer, Boston, MA
Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-9015-5
Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-1815-6
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive