Teleologia e Biologia: uma defesa do pensamento teleológico na biologia

Autores

  • Marcelo Domingos de Santis Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Biociências

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11606/issn.2178-6224v15i1p61-78

Palavras-chave:

Adaptação, Biologia evolutiva, Filosofia da ciência, Teleologia

Resumo

A linguagem teleológica pode ser definida como um discurso prospectivo, e isto tem preocupado biólogos em torno desse problema. Neste artigo, discutirei os mal-entendidos que filósofos da ciência e biólogos tiveram acerca da teleologia. Por exemplo, afirmam que a teleologia sofre de antropomorfismo (isto é, um agente de planejamento externo à referência mundial) e se refere a uma força imanente aos organismos (forças vitais ou “vitalismo”) além do alcance da investigação empírica. Argumentarei que eles estão equivocados e que a teleologia mudou seu significado e foco de sua forma pré-evolutiva, e agora pode ser usada e mantida sem violar os princípios da ciência moderna. Usando como exemplo o debate sobre adaptação e função, discutirei como a linguagem teleológica é a melhor interpretação para essas questões.

Biografia do Autor

Marcelo Domingos de Santis, Universidade de São Paulo. Instituto de Biociências

Estudante de doutorado no Curso de Pós-Graduação em Zoologia do Departamento de Zoologia, Instituto de Biociências

Referências

AMUNDSON, Ron. Historical development of the concept of adaptation. Adaptation. Pp. 11-53, in: ROSE, Michael R.; LAUDER, George V. (eds.): Adaptation. San Diego: Academic Press, 1996.

AYALA, Francisco José. Evolution, explanation, ethics and aesthetics: towards a philosophy of biology. London: Academic Press, Elsevier, 2016.

BRANDON, Robert N. Adaptation and environment. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.

CUMMINS, Robert. Neo-teleology. Pp. 157-172, in: ARIEW, Andrew; CUMMINS, Robert; PERLMAN, Mark (eds.): Functions: New Essays in the philosophy of psychology and biology. New York: Oxford University Press, 2002.

DARWIN, Charles Robert. On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. London: Murray, 1859.

DENNETT, Daniel Clement. Darwin’s dangerous idea: evolution and the meanings of life. New York: Simon and Schuster, 1995.

DIFRISCO, James. Functional explanation and the problem of functional equivalence. Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences, 65: 1-8, 2017.

FUTUYMA, Douglas J. Evolution. Sunderland: Sinauer, 2005.

GANS, Carl. Adaptation and the form-function relation. American Zoologist, 28: 681-697, 1988.

GARDNER, Andy. Adaptation as organism design. Biology Letters, 5: 861-864, 2009.

GARSON, Justin. What biological functions are and why they matter. Cambridge: CUP, 2019.

GHISELIN, Michael T. Darwin’s language may seem teleological, but his thinking is another matter. Biology and Philosophy, 9: 489-492, 1994.

GHISELIN. Michael T. Metaphysics and the Origin of Species. Albany: State University of New York Press, 1997.

GOULD, Stephen Jay. The structure of evolutionary theory. Cambridge: Harvard Press, 2002.

GOULD, Stephen Jay.; LEWONTIN, Richard C. The spandrels of San Marco and the Panglossian paradigm: a critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, B, 205: 581-98, 1979.

GOULD, Stephen Jay.; VRBA, Elisabeth S. Exaptation-a missing term in the science of form. Paleobiology, 8: 4-15, 1982.

GRANDCOLAS, Philippe. Adaptation. Pp.77-93, in: HEAMS, Thomas.; HUNEMAN, Philippe.; LECOINTRE, Guillaume.; SILBERSTEIN. Marc. (eds.): Handbook of Evolutionary Thinking in the Sciences. Berlim: Springer, 2015.

GRIFFITHS, Paul E. The historical turn in the study of adaptation. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 47: 511-532, 1996.

HEADS, Michael. Darwin’s Changing views on evolution: from centres of origin and teleology to vicariance and incomplete lineage sorting. Journal of Biogeography, 36 (6): 1018-1026, 2009.

HEMPEL, Carl Gustav. Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science. New York: Free Press, 1965.

LENNOX, James G. Teleology. Pp.324-33, in: KELLER, Evelyn Fox.; LLOYD, Elisabeth. A. (eds.): Keywords in evolutionary biology. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1992.

LENNOX, James G. Darwin was a teleologist. Biology and philosophy, 8: 409-21, 1993.

LENNOX, James G. Darwin and teleology. Pp.152-157, in: RUSE, Michael. (Ed.): The Cambridge encyclopedia of Darwin and evolutionary thought. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013.

LLOYD, Elisabeth. A. Adaptationism and the logic of research questions: how to think clearly about evolutionary causes. Biological Theory, 10: 343-62, 2015.

MACH, Ernst. The scientific conception of the world. The Vienna Circle [1929]. Pp.321-340, in SARKAR, Sahotra (ed.). The emergence of logical empiricism: from 1900 to the Vienna Circle. New York : Garland Publishing, 1996.

MAYR, Ernst. The growth of biological thought: diversity, evolution, and inheritance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982.

MAYR, Ernst. How to carry out the adaptationist program?. American Naturalist, 121: 324-334, 1983.

MAYR, Ernst. The idea of teleology. Journal of the History of Ideas, 53: 117-135, 1992.

MAYR, Ernst; Provine, Will B. The evolutionary synthesis: perspectives on the unification of biology. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 1980.

MORRIS, Suzanne C.; TAPLIN, John E. & GELMAN, Susan A. Vitalism in naive biological thinking. Developmental Psychology, 36: 582-595, 2000.

NAGEL, Ernest. The structure of science. New York: Harcourt. 1961.

NEANDER, Karen. The teleological notion of ‘Function’. Australasian Journal of Philosophy, 69: 454-468, 1991.

PIGLIUCCI, Massimo.; KAPLAN, Jonathan. The fall and rise of Dr. Pangloss: adaptationism and the Spandrels paper 20 years later. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 15: 66-70, 2000.

PIGLIUCCI, Massimo.; MULLER, Gerd. Evolution, the extended synthesis. Cambridge: MIT Press, 2010.

ROSE, Michael R.; LAUDER, George V. Post-Spandrel adaptationism. Pp.1-8, in: ROSE, Michael R.; LAUDER, George V. (eds.): Adaptation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 1996.

RUSE, Michael. Teleology in biology: is it a cause for concern?. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 4: 51-54, 1989.

SALMON, Wesley. Charles. Four decades of scientific explanation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989.

SALMON, Wesley Charles. Scientific Explanation. Pp.7-41, in: SALMON, Merrilee H.; EARMAN, John; GLYMOUR, Clark ; LENNOX, James G.; MACHAMER, Peter; MCGUIRE, J.E.; NORTON, John D.; SALMON, Wesley C.; SCHAFFNER, Kenneth F. (eds.). Introduction to the Philosophy of Science. Nova Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1992.

SHORT, Thomas L. Darwin’s Concept of final cause: neither new nor trivial. Biology and Philosophy, 17(3): 323-40, 2002.

SMITH, Richard J. Explanations for adaptations, just-so stories, and limitations on evidence in evolutionary biology. Evolutionary Anthropology, 25: 276-287, 2016.

STERENLY, Kim. Explanatory pluralism in evolutionary biology. Biology and Philosophy, 11: 193-214, 1996.

STERENLY, Kim.; GRIFFITHS, Paul G. Sex and death: An introduction to philosophy of biology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1999.

STODDARD, Mary Caswell ; YONG, Ee Hou; AKKAYNAK, Derya; SHEARD, Catherine; TOBIAS, Joseph A.; MAHADEVAN, L. Avian egg shape: Form, function, and evolution. Science, 356 (6344): 1249-1254, 2017.

WEST-EBERHARD, Mary Jane. Developmental plasticity and evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2003.

WILLIAMS, George Christopher. Natural selection domains, levels, and challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1992.

Downloads

Publicado

2020-11-17

Como Citar

SANTIS , M. D. de . Teleologia e Biologia: uma defesa do pensamento teleológico na biologia. Filosofia e História da Biologia (Fil. Hist. Biol.) , [S. l.], v. 15, n. 1, p. 61-78, 2020. DOI: 10.11606/issn.2178-6224v15i1p61-78. Disponível em: https://www.revistas.usp.br/fhb/article/view/fhb-v15-n1-04. Acesso em: 11 maio. 2021.

Edição

Seção

Artigos

Dados de financiamento