I understand that it’s a method that ascribes purposes to things. I have heard people speak very highly and lowly of it. On the one hand people say it has greater explanatory power than cause and effect. On the other, it assumes purpose in a meaningless universe. So which is it? Is it a good framework?
I know nothing of it, but my Internet search fu makes me think it’s useless as a tool of analysis.
Maybe there’s some value on teleolgy as a tool of synthesis, like metaphors. Something to ease out communication when the details aren’t particularly relevant.
It is most definitely not a good framework. It reverses cause and effect which is completely backwards to how reality works. To say that the outcome determines the process and not the other way around is incompatible with a materialist outlook and frankly a form of superstitious thinking. Purpose is an abstract and subjective notion that only exists in the mind. It is something that people assign to things or actions, not something that can exist independently of an intelligence to ascribe it. Teleology is just another way of postulating the existence of an intelligent designer. It is an attempt to disguise a religious belief as philosophy.
It’s a good framework if you assume thete is a demiurge. Theology don’t really questions the existence of a god creator of universe, but uses this existence as foundation to all further thinking.
So, if you believe in a god is one of the best ways to understand the world, but if you don’t, or don’t know, it’s useless.
Here’s a positive example I noticed: for racism, fear of strangers did not lead to economic subjugation. The psychological part of racism is a superstructural element with the purpose of justifying chattel slavery, colonization, etc.
What is the psychological part of racism? Fear of strangers?
Fear of strangers is an emerging characteristic between social groups. It can be used as a tool for justifying those things you mentioned, but it wasn’t always used for it, and not exclusively for it.
By itself, doesn’t have a purpose. It’s initially just the contrast (dialectics, if you will) between familiarity and it’s absence.
Racism wasn’t invented, nor it has a purpose. After it exists as a superstructure, it can be leveraged by agents as a tool, just like hands could be leveraged as tools once they become proficient enough in animals.
I think. I’m not used to think in these terms, though.
