Abstract
In this article, Fernández examines a remarkable convergence of ideas in Peirce’s mature thought: the Aristotelian notion of causal powers or capacities and its possible combination with some ideas about finality that Kant advanced to make sense of the notion of purpose in the behavior of organisms. He argues that this proposed synthesis deserves to gain relevance in light of new investigations aimed at clarifying issues concerning causality and explanation in science, especially in biology. After reviewing new developments and interpretations concerning the notions of mechanism, teleology, and purpose, especially in regard to their origins in the Kantian tradition, Fernández concludes this trailblazing study by hypothesizing that the characteristic “finality” of biological teleology (manifest in the very idea of purpose) results from the interaction of two basic types of causation: efficient causation and semiotic causation. This a standpoint that incorporates ideas from Peircean semiotics to characterize and justify biological teleology.
About the author
Eliseo Fernández (1935–2017) was born and educated in Argentina. For almost five decades, he worked at the Linda Hall Library of Science and Technology as a scientific consultant and taught at the University of Missouri in the physics department. He lectured and published widely on topics in the philosophy and history of science and on the thought of C. S. Peirce. Among the founders of biosemiotics, he was also a leading contributor to this journal.
References
Andersen, Holly. 2012. The case for regularity in mechanistic causal explanation. Synthese 189(3). 415–432.10.1007/s11229-011-9965-xSearch in Google Scholar
Bechtel, William and Adele Abrahamsen. 2005. Explanation: A mechanist alternative. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part C: Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 36. 421–441.10.1016/j.shpsc.2005.03.010Search in Google Scholar
Boero, Hedy. 2015. Towards the silvery peak: some keys to the evolution of Peirce’s Ethics. Cognitio: Revista de Filosofia 15(2). 257–274.Search in Google Scholar
Cartwright, Nancy & John Pemberton. 2013. Aristotelian powers: Without them, what would modern science do? In Ruth Groff & John Greco (eds.), Powers and capacities in philosophy: The new Aristotelianism, 93–112. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203075609-5Search in Google Scholar
Chauviré, Christiane. 1987. Schématisme et analyticité chez Peirce. Archives de philosophie 50(3). 413–438.Search in Google Scholar
Chevalier, Jean-Marie. 2014. Peirce lecteur de Kant. Academia At https://www.academia.edu/12367900/Peirce_lecteur_de_Kant10.4000/philosophiascientiae.1160Search in Google Scholar
Christensen, C. B. 1994. Peirce’s transformation of Kant. The Review of Metaphysics 48(1). 91–120.Search in Google Scholar
Crelier, Andrés. 2012. Reflexión y lenguaje. Perspectivas de la transformación pragmático-trascendental de la filosofía kantiana. Revista de Filosofía y Teoría Política 43. 11–43.Search in Google Scholar
Fernández, Eliseo. 2008. Signs and instruments: the convergence of Aristotelian and Kantian intuitions in biosemiotics. Biosemiotics 1(3). 347–359.10.1007/s12304-008-9011-7Search in Google Scholar
Fernández, Eliseo. 2014. Peircean habits, broken symmetries, and biosemiotics. In Vinicius Romanini & Eliseo Fernández. (eds.), 79–94. Peirce and biosemiotics: A guess at the riddle of life Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.10.1007/978-94-007-7732-3_5Search in Google Scholar
Fernández, Eliseo. 2015a. Evolution of signs, organisms and artifacts as phases of concrete generalization. Biosemiotics 8(1). 91–102.10.1007/s12304-014-9226-8Search in Google Scholar
Fernández, Eliseo. 2015b. Nomological machines and semiotic scaffolding. Paper presented at the Fifteenth Annual Gathering in Biosemiotics. Aalborg University, Copenhagen, 30 June to 4 July 2015. Available at: http://www.lindahall.org/media/papers/fernandez/NOMOLOGICAL_MACHINES_AND_SEMIOTIC_SCAFFOLDING_E_F.pdfSearch in Google Scholar
Gava, Gabriele. 2008. The purposefulness in our thought: A Kantian aid to understanding some essential features of Peirce. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 44(4). 699–727.Search in Google Scholar
Gava, Gabriele. 2011a. Peirce’s “prescision” as a transcendental method. International Journal of Philosophical Studies 19(2). 231–253.10.1080/09672559.2011.561614Search in Google Scholar
Gava, Gabriele. 2011b. Does Peirce reject transcendental philosophy? Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 93(2). 195–221.10.1515/agph.2011.009Search in Google Scholar
Gava, Gabriele. 2014. Peirce's account of purposefulness: A Kantian perspective New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315849577Search in Google Scholar
Goy, Ina & Eric Watkins, (eds). 2014. Kant’s theory of biology Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter.10.1515/9783110225792Search in Google Scholar
Haack, Susan 2007. La legitimidad de la metafísica: el legado de Kant a Peirce, y el de Peirce a la filosofía de nuestros días. Anuario filosófico 40(89). 471–494.10.15581/009.40.29267Search in Google Scholar
Hoffmeyer, Jesper. 2007. Semiotic scaffolding of living systems. In: Barbieri, Marcello (ed.), Introduction to biosemiotics: The new biological synthesis Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer: 149–166.10.1007/1-4020-4814-9_6Search in Google Scholar
Kaag, John J. 2005. Continuity and inheritance: Kant's "Critique of Judgment" and the work of C. S. Peirce. Transactions of the Charles S. Peirce Society 41(3). 515–540.Search in Google Scholar
Kaag, John J. 2014. Thinking through the imagination: Aesthetics in human cognition Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.5422/fordham/9780823254934.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Kaag, John J. 2015. The lot of the beautiful: Pragmatism and aesthetic ideals. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 23(4). 779–80110.1080/09608788.2014.977844Search in Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 1999. The critique of pure reason [CPR]. Trans. and ed. Paul Guyer and Allen Wood. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511804649Search in Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. 2000. Critique of the power of judgment [CPJ]. Ed. Paul Guyer, trans. Paul Guyer and Eric Matthews. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511804656Search in Google Scholar
Kauffman, Stuart A. 2014. Prolegomenon to patterns in evolution. BioSystems 123 3–8.10.1016/j.biosystems.2014.03.004Search in Google Scholar PubMed
Leserre, Daniel. 2008. La teoría de los signos en Peirce y los elementos de una semiótica en Kant. Paper presented at the III Jornadas "Peirce en Argentina", 11–12 September 2008. Available at: http://www.unav.es/gep/IIIPeirceArgentinaLeserre.htmlSearch in Google Scholar
McKitrick, Jennifer 2010. Manifestations as effects. In Anna Marmodoro (ed.), The Metaphysics of powers: Their grounding and their manifestations 73–83. New York: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar
Mumford, S. & R. L. Anjum. 2011. Getting causes from powers Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199695614.001.0001Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1931–1958. Collected papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. [CP]. Vols. 1–8. C. Hartshorne, P. Weiss, A. W. Burks (eds.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Peirce, Charles S. 1992, 1998. [EP]. The essential Peirce The Peirce Edition Project (ed.). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Search in Google Scholar
© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston
