No Teleology or Theology in Biology

The concepts Chance, Change, Coincidence, Philosophy, Causality, Teleology, Theology and Evolution theory in respective perspective.


In the NRC-Handelsblad newspaper, 18 June 2016, the Science addendum shows a two page story on Chance as a part of Logic, in philosophy. Chance can be read here as Coincidence. Margriet van der Heijden describes her interview with professor Klaas Landsman (Mathematical Physics) and professor Ellen van Wolde (Old Testament Exegesis and Source Texts of Judaism), both at Radboud University Nijmegen.

Unfortunately the 2nd chapter, the definition of the concept Chance, leads them to Chance in Evolution. Van der Heijden asks Landsman whether he means that [the philosopher] Spinoza creates an opportunity for Darwin and the Theory of Evolution, by disconnecting Determinism from Devine Providence. Determinism being the opposite of Chance or Coincidence.

Landsman responds: 'Well, I do not know if real, pure Chance is indeed a leading part of this theory [=Evolution theory]. Species adapt to changing environmental circumstances thanks to genetic mutations. But these mutations can be ascribed to radiation or smoking ... making it again possible to find a cause.'

First of all, the adaptations mr Landsman writes about are not due to genetic mutations, nor to environmental changes. 'Species adapt to changing environmental circumstances thanks to genetic mutations'. Here is causation (one leads to the other) and here is teleology (better fit to circumstances). Causation is a valid argument in natural sciences but, as we shall see, neither genetic mutations nor changing circumstances are a cause for adaptation.

Secondly, species do not adapt to changing environmental circumstances thanks to genetic mutations, mr Landsman. Species do not adapt, individual living entities change. Each individual changes in a different way. That change is (driven by) chance. That change leads by chance to new chances: more or less offspring being the most prominent. So, Evolution = Chance (and not Teleology).

Larmarckism has been superseded by Darwinism. Each zebra is different from any other zebra. That difference might have an evolutionary effect, more or less offspring being the most prominent. Other effects might be longer lifespan, blindness, purple stripes. Most mutations do not have any effect on procreation, lifespan or the rest. They are neutral.

If there is an evolutionary effect, we call it an adaptation if it leads to more offspring. If it leads to less offspring, we call it an illness. Read carefully: these changes do not have to be genetic, nor mutations! Culture, including Theology in effect, is a result of Evolution - it helps to create more offspring. So are black and white markings on a zebra.

Thirdly, Teleology assumes working towards a future goal, a target, for example a better world or better adaptation. That would be nice, assuming that molds, oaks and elephants have a concept called 'future'. Or assuming that Evolution does. I think that you will agree that they do not. Teleology, Evolution and Theology are all a subject within the Logic of Life, better known as Biology, not the other way around.

In short: each living individual is by chance different from any other. These differences may have an effect on procreation. That's called evolution. The outcome can be more or less offspring. More offspring we call adaptation, less we call illness. That's all. Everything else is clutter.