{"id":49,"date":"2008-04-14T00:20:00","date_gmt":"2008-04-14T03:20:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/scienceblogs.com.br\/eccemedicus\/2008\/04\/teleologia-ii\/"},"modified":"2008-04-14T00:20:00","modified_gmt":"2008-04-14T03:20:00","slug":"teleologia-ii","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/2008\/04\/14\/teleologia-ii\/","title":{"rendered":"Teleologia II"},"content":{"rendered":"

Ernst Mayr defendia uma filosofia particular para a Biologia. Uma das raz\u00f5es para isso \u00e9 o fato de o pensamento biol\u00f3gico contar com certas caracter\u00edsticas pr\u00f3prias. Talvez, a principal delas seja o pensamento teleol\u00f3gico. A linguagem m\u00e9dica \u00e9 obscenamente teleol\u00f3gica com a desculpa de ser pragm\u00e1tica. At\u00e9 posso aceitar esse argumento. Por\u00e9m, n\u00e3o concordo quando os interlocutores comunicam-se assim por desconhecimento total do assunto e sua pol\u00eamica no universo da Biologia. O texto que se segue pertence ao portal Talk Origins<\/a><\/p>\n

“There are two forms of teleological explanation (Lennox 1992<\/a>). External teleological explanation derives from Plato – a goal is imposed by an agent, a mind, which has intentions and purpose. Internal teleological explanation derives from Aristotle, and is a functional notion. Aristotle divided causes up into four kinds – material (the stuff of which a thing is made), formal (its form or structure), efficient (the powers of the causes to achieve the things they achieve) and final (the purpose or end for which a thing exists). Internal teleology is really a kind of causal explanation in terms of the value of the thing being explained. This sort of teleology doesn’t impact on explanations in terms of efficient causes. You can, according to Aristotle, use both.<\/span><\/p>\n

Evolutionary explanations are most nearly like Aristotle’s formal and efficient causes. Any functional explanation begs the further question – what is the reason why that function is important to that organism? – and that begs the even further question – why should that organism exist at all? The answers to these questions depend on the history of the lineage leading to the organism.<\/span><\/p>\n

External teleology is dead in biology, but there is a further important distinction to be made. Mayr [1982<\/a>: 47-51] distinguished four kinds of explanations that are sometimes called teleology: telenomic (goal-seeking, Aristotle’s final causes, ‘for-the-sake-of-which’ explanations); teleomatic (lawlike behaviour that is not goal-seeking); adapted systems (which are not goal seeking at all, but exist just because they survived); and cosmic teleologyO’Grady and Brooks 1988<\/a>]. Only systems that are actively directed by a goal are truly teleological. Most are just teleomatic, and some (e.g., genetic programs) are teleonomic (internal teleology), because they seek an end.”<\/span><\/p>\n\n\n\n
How the four forms of apparent teleology relate.<\/span><\/caption>\n
\"Venn<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

Exemplos de processos teleom\u00e1ticos<\/span> s\u00e3o aqueles em que a lei da gravidade e a 2a lei da termodin\u00e2mica regulam as transforma\u00e7\u00f5es. N\u00e3o apresentam um objetivo final. Os processos<\/span> teleon\u00f4micos<\/span> s\u00e3o guiados por programas e dependem da exist\u00eancia de uma meta que pode ser uma estrutura, uma fun\u00e7\u00e3o fisiol\u00f3gica ou mesmo um comportamento. Os programas est\u00e3o sujeitos \u00e0 sele\u00e7\u00e3o natural. Para Mayr, o programa gen\u00e9tico proporciona em exemplo de processo teleon\u00f4mico. Os sistemas adaptativos<\/span> (por exemplo, fun\u00e7\u00f5es de org\u00e3os ou comportamentos de esp\u00e9cies) t\u00eam sido erroneamente chamados de teleol\u00f3gicos. Segundo Munson (1971) isso ocorre porque ao estudar um tra\u00e7o adaptativo buscamos uma explica\u00e7\u00e3o. Essa explica\u00e7\u00e3o \u00e9 dada contando-se a hist\u00f3ria evolutiva desse tra\u00e7o como sendo um sucesso da sele\u00e7\u00e3o natural. De novo, n\u00e3o h\u00e1 metas.
\nEsse racioc\u00ednio muitas vezes explica o aparecimento de doen\u00e7as que, assim, n\u00e3o necessitam mais ser vistas como maldi\u00e7\u00f5es \u00e0 esp\u00e9cie humana. A raz\u00e3o m\u00e9dica se beneficiaria do pensamento evolucion\u00e1rio que pode estar distante da pr\u00e1tica cl\u00ednica, mas traria de volta sua historicidade. Afinal, a hist\u00f3ria de um ser vivo, t\u00e3o cara a Mayr, \u00e9 o que o diferencia de um ente inanimado; e o que o torna irredut\u00edvel \u00e0 f\u00edsico-qu\u00edmica, sem recorrer a explica\u00e7\u00f5es vitalistas.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Ernst Mayr defendia uma filosofia particular para a Biologia. Uma das raz\u00f5es para isso \u00e9 o fato de o pensamento biol\u00f3gico contar com certas caracter\u00edsticas pr\u00f3prias. Talvez, a principal delas seja o pensamento teleol\u00f3gico. A linguagem m\u00e9dica \u00e9 obscenamente teleol\u00f3gica com a desculpa de ser pragm\u00e1tica. At\u00e9 posso aceitar esse argumento. Por\u00e9m, n\u00e3o concordo quando […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":466,"featured_media":50,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"pgc_sgb_lightbox_settings":"","_vp_format_video_url":"","_vp_image_focal_point":[],"footnotes":""},"categories":[2,12,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-49","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-biologia","category-evolucao","category-filosofia"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/247\/2011\/08\/teleolpic.gif","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/466"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=49"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/49\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/50"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=49"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=49"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.blogs.unicamp.br\/eccemedicus\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=49"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}