Teleology and Purpose in Evolution (Telos) (from Evolutionary Theory Conference Summary), Esalen Center for Theory & Research

Evolutionary Theory
An Esalen Invitational Conference
October 5 to 10, 2003

Teleology and Purpose in Evolution (Telos)
Group Discussion

Although it was never discussed as a singular topic at this year’s conference (it was in the past), the notion of teleology—the study of the purpose or goal of evolution—was addressed by many presenters during the conference. For example, Jay Ogilvy opened the conference with a few orienting comments about the subject. He noted that the participants in this conference series over the past five years had largely rejected what Ogilvy called a "Platonic Telos" (pre-determined Forms or Potentials) or a "Teilhardian Telos" (a pre-determined Omega Point or Grand Destiny), in which there is a clear, established known-in-advance plan for the evolution of the universe and all that lives in it. Ogilvy suggested that much of Ken Wilber’s work claims that the universe is more determined toward a specific spiritual end-point than it likely is. Ogilvy thinks more traditional or theistic conceptions of telos and purpose are too pre-determined to square up with the empirical evidence for contingency and random events in the history of the universe. Instead, Ogilvy suggested that there may be a complexifying telos or emerging telos that arises in the course of evolution itself. As an example, Ogilvy referred to his work as a future scenario planner for many communities. The hopes of and planning by human societies act as a form of downward causality and intentionality in evolution. The hope of a better future motivates communities to take action to realize that future. This is a form of emergent telos.

Coming from his dual background in both philosophy of science and theology, Phil Clayton mentioned that he wants to hold the creative tension in the conference between Terrence Deacon’s non-teleological or "moving-away-from" view of evolution (moving away from simplicity toward complexity) and Michael Murphy’s view, in which divinity has a teleological influence on evolution and the quest for human potential. Where Deacon thinks the notion of pre-determined potentials is too pre-formationist for him, Murphy sees human evolution realizing similar (if not identical) potentials in vastly different cultural contexts. Clayton suggested that there can be room for a creative tension between these two views of telos and that this conference need not resolve that tension prematurely.

During his presentation, Telmo Pievani mentioned teleology from the standpoint of Stephen Jay Gould’s emphasis on contingency. Although Pievani’s own work has been strongly influenced by Gould, his interpretation of Gould’s work has not precluded him from recognizing the emergence of directional trends or canalizations within long evolutionary lineages. Pievani thinks it is crucial to move beyond the epistemological dichotomy between pure randomness (Gould’s so-called "drunkard’s walk") and tight directional progress toward a pre-established final goal.

Further Questions for Telos

If several evolutionary lineages converge on a successful property, such as eye sight (the eye was invented independently multiple times in evolution), is that property a pre-determined potential of the universe? Or is it an emergent potential that many lineages just happen to discover?

Is it possible that there are some core potentials of the universe (eyesight or even self-reflective human-like consciousness) but that the universe is free and contingent with respect to where, when, and how the evolutionary process realizes or discoveries those potentials?

Is the notion of "convergent evolution"—as expressed by the paleontologist Simon Conway Morris in Life’s Solution (Cambridge, 2003)—a possible middle path between the extremes of pre-determinism and radical contingency?

Conferences Menu | Summary Home
Conference Introduction and Overview | A New Way of "Explaining" Evolution | Ontological Emergence and the Failure of Reductionism | A Natural Hierarchy of Dispositions and Nondual Co-Emergence | Western Perspectives on Self, Subjectivity, and Intersubjectivity | Buddhist and Phenomenological Perspectives on Mind and Self | Evolution and the Extra-ordinary Capacities of Body and Mind | The Challenges and Rewards in Science and Spirituality Dialogues | Teleology and Purpose in Evolution (Telos) | Conclusion: The Who, What, Where, Why, and When of Value |