I agree. I didn’t state “intrinsically purposeful” but “intrinsically purposeless” to distinguish teleology from teleonomy, a term coined by Jacques Monod to distance biological purpose from conscious purpose, thereby excluding Design - without explaining how biological purpose originated!Purpose is externally assigned, it is not intrinsic. A hammer does not have an intrinsic purpose; its purpose is assigned by the wielder.
When a boss employs a worker, her purpose is to get some work done. The worker’s purpose is to earn money. Those are two different purposes assigned at the same time to the same person. Purposes will change throughout life, and may be multiple.
Purpose is not intrinsic, so evolution lacking intrinsic purpose is not exactly unusual.
.
No response!… And that doesn’t even touch on the logical fact that an entirely
So you don’t think the purpose of clouds is to drop rain on the land for plants to grow, or the purpose of the eye is to see and the purpose of muscles is to move joints, the purpose of leaves is to make sugar, the purpose of wings is to help a bird fly, etc. etc. Purpose obviously can be intrinsic.Purpose is externally assigned, it is not intrinsic. A hammer does not have an intrinsic purpose; its purpose is assigned by the wielder.
When a boss employs a worker, her purpose is to get some work done. The worker’s purpose is to earn money. Those are two different purposes assigned at the same time to the same person. Purposes will change throughout life, and may be multiple.
Purpose is not intrinsic, so evolution lacking intrinsic purpose is not exactly unusual.
rossum
The purposes of clouds are to shade us from the Sun and to indicate which way the wind is blowing. They also help to amuse us by making shapes like castles and faces, so helping pass the time.So you don’t think the purpose of clouds is to drop rain on the land for plants to grow,
This is a clever but inept evasion. There is a clear distinction between the kind of purpose Peter Plato proposed and those you have put forth. The former is an intrinsic, or objective, purpose because it is the end towards which a cloud is naturally directed whereas your purposes are extrinsic, or subjective, because they are not necessary to the existence or function of clouds.The purposes of clouds are to shade us from the Sun and to indicate which way the wind is blowing. They also help to amuse us by making shapes like castles and faces, so helping pass the time.
Saying “the” purpose is often a mistake. A single thing can have many purposes, or none.
rossum
Of course I don’t cease to be the same person, in the sense that I am centred upon roughly the same configuration of matter and energy, occupying about the same amount of space (though less space than I occupied 18 months ago, I’m pleased to say!) - but neither I nor any learned philosopher has ever claimed that humans are ‘immutable’. I might be the same person, the same proximal identity that I was when I was born, but I have some fairly apparent differences. The claim of immutability, when applied to an eternal, spiritual being, one that is unimpeded by time, space or indeed any dimensional limitation, implies that there is no change, none whatsoever. The change from not conceiving of a plan for creation, to conceiving of a plan for creation, to actually executing that plan for creation (however that might be accomplished by a nonphysical entity) - if such is what your God is claimed to have done - demonstrates a change from one state to another.No response!
We appear to be talking at cross-purposes. I take “intrinsic” to be “internally generated”, while “extrinsic” is “externally generated”. A cloud is formed of water, and water has no mechanism for internally generating any purpose. An external entity may generate a purpose, but that is an extrinsic purpose, not an intrinsic one. Different external entities will generate different external purposes. Hence my insistence on plural purposes, not “the purpose”, singular.There is a clear distinction between the kind of purpose Peter Plato proposed and those you have put forth. The former is an intrinsic, or objective, purpose because it is the end towards which a cloud is naturally directed whereas your purposes are extrinsic, or subjective, because they are not necessary to the existence or function of clouds.
You said, “Purpose is externally assigned, it is not intrinsic. A hammer does not have an intrinsic purpose; its purpose is assigned by the wielder.”We appear to be talking at cross-purposes. I take “intrinsic” to be “internally generated”, while “extrinsic” is “externally generated”. A cloud is formed of water, and water has no mechanism for internally generating any purpose. An external entity may generate a purpose, but that is an extrinsic purpose, not an intrinsic one. Different external entities will generate different external purposes. Hence my insistence on plural purposes, not “the purpose”, singular.
rossum
Your thinking is much too reductionist. The point is that the intrinsic “purpose” of a cloud is formed independently of an external entity. Short of God, what entity do you propose created the water cycle; or to speak in a more modern tone, what entity do you propose arranged the laws of physics so as to allow for something as amazing and unlikely as the water cycle? The fact that this process achieves such remarkable ends, I believe, justifies the inference of purpose. Now, we may recognize this purpose, but we do not create it anymore than we created water itself.We appear to be talking at cross-purposes. I take “intrinsic” to be “internally generated”, while “extrinsic” is “externally generated”. A cloud is formed of water, and water has no mechanism for internally generating any purpose. An external entity may generate a purpose, but that is an extrinsic purpose, not an intrinsic one. Different external entities will generate different external purposes. Hence my insistence on plural purposes, not “the purpose”, singular.
rossum
a hammer does not wander around aimlessly seeking purpose…it is not unguided and blind. It is a tool. Tools have purposes. A hammer has many conventional as well as unconventional uses.Purpose is externally assigned, it is not intrinsic. A hammer does not have an intrinsic purpose; its purpose is assigned by the wielder.
When a boss employs a worker, her purpose is to get some work done. The worker’s purpose is to earn money. Those are two different purposes assigned at the same time to the same person. Purposes will change throughout life, and may be multiple.
Purpose is not intrinsic, so evolution lacking intrinsic purpose is not exactly unusual.
rossum
Buffalo:a hammer does not wander around aimlessly seeking purpose…it is not unguided and blind. It is a tool. Tools have purposes. A hammer has many conventional as well as unconventional uses.
The mantra in design is “form follows function” so that would mean the form, design or shape that an object takes is determined by the function it performs. That function is its purpose. Purpose is often not subjectively determined (Although the point of Intelligent Design or before that, the argument from Design is that in nature, things appear to have purpose or function that could have been part of the intention of a Cosmic Subject).Buffalo:
Besides, things usually have primary purposes and secondary purposes. The primary purpose is not assigned by a user. It is assigned by the maker. A clear example would by “money.” The primary purpose of money is as an exchange for goods wanted or needed. That it can also be used, when ignited, to light a cigarette, is a secondary purpose. In fact, the US Federal government will enforce the primary purpose of money, and usually does not take too kindly to its being set on fire.
Also, the destruction of money holds Real consequences: it is no more and so is unavailable for its rather important primary purpose.
God bless,
jd
Tell me. Which part of a hand assigns its intrinsic purpose? If the purpose is assigned by something external to the hand, then the purpose is extrinsic.You said, “Purpose is externally assigned, it is not intrinsic. A hammer does not have an intrinsic purpose; its purpose is assigned by the wielder.”
What about, say, a hand?
I deny that this purpose is intrinsic. Hence it is not an “undeniable” intrinsic purpose.It has an undeniable intrinsic purpose: to grasp and pick up objects.
Agreed. However these purposes are not fixed. At one time my intrinsic purpose may be to get a drink of water. At another time my intrinsic purpose may be to feed myself. At yet another time my intrinsic purpose may be to sleep.There are intrinsic as well as extrinsic purposes!
Rather, let us agree that we disagree on the meanings of “intrinsic” and “extrinsic”.Intrinsic purposes are those that naturally arise from the form of the object. Extrinsic are those that can arise incidentally apart from nature. Let’s admit that and move on.
So, if we disregard all external entities all we are left with is the cloud itself. What part of a cloud is capable of generating purpose? The droplets of water? The intervening air? What part of the cloud has that capability?Your thinking is much too reductionist. The point is that the intrinsic “purpose” of a cloud is formed independently of an external entity.
God is not the cloud; the cloud is not God. Any purpose assigned by God is extrinsic, not intrinsic.Short of God…
Did you really mean that? A hammer guides itself? If left unattended it will move towards the nearest nail? Can we get back into the real world please. A hammer is an inert lump of material. It does not have a sense of sight and it cannot guide itself.a hammer does not wander around aimlessly seeking purpose…it is not unguided and blind.
No. The maker of the tool has a purpose. The user of the tool has a purpose. The hammer itself is inert and does not have an intrinsic purpose.It is a tool. Tools have purposes.
Which is why it is an error to talk about a singular ‘purpose’ for a hammer.A hammer has many conventional as well as unconventional uses.
I’m going to be rude and butt in. The whole point of something being intrinsic is that it is not assigned by anything other than its very nature. Therefore, no “part” of the hand assigns it its intrinsic purpose. Its intrinsic purpose is virtually synonymous with its existence.Tell me. Which part of a hand assigns its intrinsic purpose? If the purpose is assigned by something external to the hand, then the purpose is extrinsic.
See my response to your reply to Peter Plato above. Things don’t ascribe purpose to themselves. They have purpose by their very nature.So, if we disregard all external entities all we are left with is the cloud itself. What part of a cloud is capable of generating purpose? The droplets of water? The intervening air? What part of the cloud has that capability?
Not so. You are misunderstanding the distinciton. The extrinsic purposes are those that are assigned to a thing by unrelated entities and not related to its fundamental nature. Nothing is unrelated to God and, further, a thing’s intrinsic purpose is not assigned by God ex post facto, but is rather the final cause of the thing itself. No material thing exists apart from form and essence.God is not the cloud; the cloud is not God. Any purpose assigned by God is extrinsic, not intrinsic.
PeterPlato:The mantra in design is “form follows function” so that would mean the form, design or shape that an object takes is determined by the function it performs. That function is its purpose. Purpose is often not subjectively determined (Although the point of Intelligent Design or before that, the argument from Design is that in nature, things appear to have purpose or function that could have been part of the intention of a Cosmic Subject).
Regardless of the Design argument, if “form follows function” then the purpose or function of any natural object or part is determined by its form, which is inherent to what the object is, so purpose is intrinsic to form. The form of something determines its intrinsic purpose. A wing is for flying, an eye for seeing, a stomach for digesting, etc. etc. To claim otherwise is not to use the brain for its intrinsic purpose - to think!
Compare:Did you really mean that? A hammer guides itself? If left unattended it will move towards the nearest nail? Can we get back into the real world please. A hammer is an inert lump of material. It does not have a sense of sight and it cannot guide itself.
No. The maker of the tool has a purpose. The user of the tool has a purpose. The hammer itself is inert and does not have an intrinsic purpose.
Which is why it is an error to talk about a singular ‘purpose’ for a hammer.
rossum