Telos: The revival of an Aristotelian concept in present day ethics

Inquiry

Volumn 48, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 62-75

  Hauskeller, Michael ^a,b,c  

^a KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^b Forschungsinstitut für Philosophie Hannover   (Germany)

^c NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33747192865     PISSN: 0020174X     EISSN: 15023923     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00201740510015356     Document Type: Review

References (42)

1. See Lee T. R., Cody C./Plastow E., Consumer Attitudes towards Technological Innovations in Food Processing (Guildford: University of Surrey, 1985).
2. See Hamstra I. A., Public Opinion about Biotechnology: A Survey of Surveys (European Federation of Biotechnology Task Group on Public Reception of Biotechnology, 1998).
3. Banner M., Report of the Committee to Consider the Ethical Implications of Emerging Technologies in the Breeding of Farm Animals (UK Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food, 1995).
4. See Gott M., "Ethical issues relating to transgenic animal production", Anzccart News, 15 (March 2002).
5. Taylor P. W., Respect for Nature. A Theory of Environmental Ethics (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1986), p. 45. Cf. especially pp. 119-29.
6. Rollin B., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals (Cambridge, Mass.: Cambridge University Press, 1995), p. 157.
7. Rollin B., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals ( Ibid., p. 159.
8. Rollin B., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals ( Ibid., pp. 168-9.
9. Rollin B., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals ( Ibid., p. 160.
10. Rollin B., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals ( Ibid., p. 164.
11. Rollin B., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals ( Ibid., p. 171.
12. Rollin B., The Frankenstein Syndrome. Ethical and Social Issues in the Genetic Engineering of Animals ( Ibid., p. 172.
13. In his earlier book Animal Rights and Human Morality (Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1981), Rollin seems to at least consider a different view. "We (...) do not wish to prolong a life that is in gross and hideous violation of the creature's telos, even if the creature is conscious and not suffering." (p. 60) This passage suggests that an animal's telos ought to be respected even if violating it does not make the animal suffer.
14. M. W. Fox, "Transgenic Animals: Ethical and Animal Welfare Concerns", in P. Wheale and R. McNally (eds), The Bio-Revolution. Cornucopia or Pandora's Box? (London and Winchester, Mass.: Pluto Press, 1990), p. 38.
15. M. W. Fox, " The Bio-Revolution. Cornucopia or Pandora's Box? ( Ibid., pp. 31-54.
16. M. W. Fox, " The Bio-Revolution. Cornucopia or Pandora's Box? ( Ibid., p. 34.
17. M. W. Fox, " The Bio-Revolution. Cornucopia or Pandora's Box? ( Ibid., p. 32.
18. Fox M. W., Superpigs and Wondercorn: The Brave New World of Biotechnology and Where It All May Lead (New York: Lyons and Burford, 1992), p. 26.
19. Both quoted by Fox, Superpigs and Wondercorn, p. 23.
20. Leahy M. P. T., Against Liberation. Putting Animals in Perspective (London/New York: Routledge, 1991), pp. 220, 74.
21. See K. v. Fritz, "Teleologie bei Aristoteles", in G. A. Seeck (ed). Die Naturphilosophie des Aristoteles (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1975), pp. 243-50.
22. Aristotle, De Partibus Animalium (PA), I.1, 639b.
23. Physics (Phys.), II.3, 195a.
24. See also Physics II.8, 199b.
25. Cf. Aristotle, De Anima II.4, 415b.
26. There are in Aristotle's writings only two very short passages that might be taken to indicate such an external finality (PA IV.13, 696b26; Politics 1256b16) but there are good reasons not to take them at face value. See D. M. Balme, "Teleology and necessity", p. 279, in Gotthelf A./Lennox J. G. (eds), Philosophical Issues in Aristotle's Biology (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987), pp. 275-85;
27. Wolfgang Kullmann, "Different concepts of the final cause in Aristotle", in A. Gotthelf (ed.), Aristotle on Nature and Living Things (Bristol: Bristol Classical Press, 1985), pp. 169-75.
28. Metaphysica (Metaphysics) A.3, 983a. See also PA I.5, 645a. This argument is, of course, not less circular than Fox's.
29. Cooper J. M., "Hypothetical Necessity and Natural Theology", p. 272, in Gotthelf/Lennox, pp. 243-274.
30. See Woodbridge F. J. E., Aristotle's Vision of Nature (New York: Columbia University Press, 1965), p. 79.
31. Bacon F., Novum Organon I.48.
32. Whitehead A. N., Adventures of Ideas (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1933), p. 237.
33. Jonas H., The Phenomenon of Life. Towards a Philosophical Biology (New York: Harper and Row, 1963), ch. II.II.1.
34. Cf. Dupré J., "In defence of classification", Studies in the History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences 32 (2001), pp. 203-19.
35. Cf. Dunbar I. M., "What's in a classification?", in P. Singer and P. Cavalieri (eds), The Great Ape Project (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1993), pp. 109-12.
36. St. R. L. Clark, "Apes and the idea of kindred", in The Great Ape Project, pp. 113-125.
37. Taylor P. W., p. 124.
38. See Balme D. M., "Aristotle's biology was not essentialist" and especially the appendix "Note on the aporia in Metaphysics Z", in Gotthelf and Lennox, loc. cit.
39. See Balme D. M., Aristotle's De Partibus Animalium I and De Generatione Animalium I (with excerpts from GA II.1-3) (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1972), p. 97.
40. That we can harm somebody without causing any suffering or pain is a common notion in legislation and in common morality. Cf. Feinberg J., Harm to Others. The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law (New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1984).
41. Apart from those already mentioned for instance Verhoog H., "The concept of intrinsic value and transgenic animals", Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics 5 (2), pp. 147-60;
42. Rolston III H., Environmental Ethics: Duties to and Values in the Natural Environment (Philadelphia: Temple University Press, 1988).