While teleological explanations reveal that every entity was created for a purpose, Lucretius’ deliberately denies the argument to assert that the belief is preposterous and holds no ground. According to him, accidentalism is what led for things to happen the way they do. He further argues that teleological explanations prevent logical meaning and reason of things to be understood by people ( Carus & Bailey, 1910). For instance, the purpose of hands would not be emphasized as enabling a person to carry out normal tasks but provided for in scientific justifications. Therefore, he explains that that teleology is false and too subjective. There are restrictions that hinder true distinctions from being explained as the true cause of occurrences.
Even though the existence of divinity is explained through natural happenings of things, his arguments are good and reasonable. Too much emphasis on teleological arguments avoids or denies scientific arguments of accidental happenings that occur without an original intent ( Lehmann-Muriithi Cardoso & Lamiell, 2016). In some instances, adverse weather calamities may occur due to climate change which is a result of negative human actions. In this regard, teleological arguments are not suitable in every situation as some conditions are often manipulated. For instance, disability brought about by an automobile accident cannot be justified as having a reason or purpose.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Despite it being closely associated with consequentialism where the purpose of our actions determines morality, teleological arguments are limited in its application to real life happenings. Body parts are necessary but giving simple arguments of there being a purpose of their existence bars scientific explanations ( Moore, 2017). They are not the final cause in determining their presence or why they had been formed in such a manner ( Rocca, (Ed.), 2017) . At the same time, it does not explain the reason of lack or scarcity to those who do not have certain body parts.
References
Carus, L., & Bailey, C. (1910). Lucretius on the Nature of Things.
Lehmann-Muriithi, K., Cardoso, C. D. R. D., & Lamiell, J. T. (2016). Understanding human being within the framework of William Stern’s critical personalism: Teleology, holism, and valuation. In Psychology as the Science of Human Being (pp. 209-223). Springer, Cham.
Moore, B. L. (2017). Teleology, Ecology, and Unity and the French Enlightenment. In Ecological Literature and the Critique of Anthropocentrism (pp. 119-131). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Rocca, J. (Ed.). (2017). Teleology in the Ancient World: Philosophical and Medical Approaches . Cambridge University Press.
