1 Comment

"I try to defend a moderate, naturalistically respectable account of moral teleology. I agree that history has no iron laws and no predetermined goals. But I do think that there are mechanisms in place that more or less reliably push social change in a certain direction, and I try to explain what those mechanisms are, how they work, and why the changes they bring about ought to count as progressive. We need to steelman teleology, then see how well it fares."

If there is no archē then there is no tēlos required to guide it. These arrive in a language (game) that maker- animals use.

Our humanity arose in evolution so we humans are not made, but we make up/do/over/for (at a recursive remove this becomes us in history... our later stories). Therefore if we make and world-build out of reasons that were not made (in our image or otherwise) (because evolution) then the archē and the tēlos [are/is] ours alone, we make the tēlos and project it back where it was not. We survive so it makes sense to us, but, there was no beginning, so there is no end. We world-build anyways, we say we were always here, and we make it so, thus complexity arises in economics and the illusion of progress, a story we can tell apart as a part of us, now, then, so we have made ourselves in this image... such a confounding confusion, success in our failure, we live as if the tēlos is not us, but we live on anyways.

Evolution baptizes with sin.

Expand full comment