Non-teleological Thinking
In 2021 I wrote a really mediocre essay on the “Log from the Sea of Cortez,” a book by John Steinbeck and his friend Ed Ricketts. Within one chapter (the only one mostly written by Ricketts) they address the idea that teleological thinking, seeing that events in the world should or shouldn’t happen, good/bad, right/wrong, is a fundamentally flawed approach to science. Not only is it flawed, it corrupts an underlying neutrality that allows science to record accurate observations and then eventually draw meaningful conclusions.
Being a young scientist in a challenging world, the current pressures are to win money and publish high-profile papers. The pressure is so intense at times that it can and does interfere with my ability to get other things done, like teaching, research, life, relationships. Buried in there, deep down, I believe we/I have let teleology slip into our work. Reviews these days are chock full of of thoughts on the overall research you should be doing, not the proposed research being submitted. Feedback feels targeted not at trying to support the work being put forth, but trying to steer all work into the preferences of others or “the field.” We do our best and often still it is not enough, especially if you try to present a new approach.
I could go on and on and on about this. Marco Giancotti wrote a really nice essay that captures a lot of the spirit of that original post without all of my rushed, anxious writing. I think teleology/non-teleology is more than just a scientific idea and really more of a philosophical approach to your relationship with the world. It’s an approach has helped me feel more calm and at peace with my physical and social surroundings.
2025-11-15 10:46