The relationship between biological function and teleology: Implications for biology education

Abstract

This paper explicates the relationship between biological function and teleology by focusing not only on difference but also on conceptual overlap. By doing so, this paper is meant to increase awareness of the misleading potential of biological function and the educational necessity to explicate the meaning of biological function to biology students to prevent them from drawing inadequate teleological conclusions about biological phenomena. The conceptual overlap between teleology and biological function lies in the notion of telos (end, goal). Biologically inadequate teleology assumes that teloi (ends, goals) exist in nature and that natural mechanisms are directed towards teloi. Such inadequate teleological assumptions have been documented in students’ reasoning about biological phenomena. Biological function, however, does not involve the assumption that teloi exist in nature. Rather, biologists use the notion of telos as an epistemological tool whenever they consider a structure or mechanism functional because they view this structure or mechanism as a means to an end (telos). Whereas for biologists such means-ends conceptualizations represent a productive tool for identifying biological phenomena functionally, for students, such means-ends considerations can be misleading. Therefore, this paper explicates how far the concept of biological function involves reference to ends (teloi) and how it relates to biological mechanisms. The paper draws implications on how to prevent students from slipping from functional reasoning into inadequate teleological reasoning.

Teleology and evolution education: introduction to the special issue

“…Students tend to argue that the function of a trait is the only causal factor explaining why the trait came into existence without linking the function of the trait to evolutionary mechanisms. Trommler and Hammann (2020) explore the relationship between biological function and teleology. Drawing on a range of recent positions from the philosophy of biology, Trommler and Hammann argue that biologists use the notion of telos as an epistemological tool when they consider a structure or a mechanism to be functional.…”

“…He also suggests comparing and contrasting acceptable natural selection teleology and unacceptable design teleology. Trommler and Hammann (2020) propose explicitly addressing acceptable epistemological teleology and unacceptable ontological teleology to prevent students from unknowingly slipping from one form of teleology into another. González Galli et al (2020) suggest familiarizing students with the different forms of acceptable and unacceptable teleology in a range of different contexts so that students can distinguish between them and metacognitively regulate their use.…”

The Impact of Direct Challenges to Student Endorsement of Teleological Reasoning on Understanding and Acceptance of Natural Selection

“…González Galli et al (15) argue that while teleological reasoning should be regulated, there may be some heuristic, explanatory, or predictive value in teleological statements, under appropriate scienti c circumstances. Some authors have described legitimate uses of teleology in biology, such as selective (in contrast to design, see (8)) and epistemological (in contrast to ontological, see (10)) teleology. See (15,45,46) for suggestions on teaching strategies to help students self-regulate their inappropriate use of teleology beyond those pedagogical strategies presented here.…”

“…Design teleology purports that an adaptation occurred according to the intentions of an external agent (external design teleology) or to ful l the needs of the organism (internal design teleology)(8). This can lead students to assume that all traits are adaptations that evolved toward a prescribed functional endpoint due to a sense of goal-directed agency or conscious intention (9,10). Therefore, when students endorse design teleology they do not acknowledge the veridical evolutionary mechanisms of genetic variation from random genetic changes and sexual recombination or the importance of non-adaptive mechanisms such as genetic drift and gene ow.…”

Teachers' ability to diagnose and deal with alternative student conceptions of evolution

“…In the context of evolution, teleological conceptions are the most commonly found alternative conceptions among students (Beniermann, 2019; Lammert, 2012; Settlage, 1994). Here, teleological conceptions are problematic if they have an underlying design stance (Kampourakis, 2020) or provide the function of a trait as the only causal factor for the existence of the trait without linking the function to the process of natural selection (Trommler & Hammann, 2020). Some authors maintain that even explanations based on natural selection have a teleological nature (Kampourakis, 2020; Lennox, 1993).…”