Conceptual impressions surrounding this post have yet to be substantiated, corroborated, confirmed or woven into a larger argument, context or network.
There are some who argue that design is of little importance. However, I believe that a full understanding of the concept of design remains veiled, ill defined and unexplored. Duality describes the position from which we generally view the world while remaining ignorant of the meaning and purpose that brings forward the phenomenon we describe as design.
A common perspective is that there must be a purpose supporting every position. In other words, design to some degree should be readily apparent to every observer. This argument suggests that design is fundamentally an objective exercise even though the concept of impartiality eventually falls victim to an array of subjective interpretation.
For the most part the concept of subjectivity runs opposite to the scientific paradigm as it is applied in contemporary society today. Scientific investigations into the world of the quantum, i.e. participatory universe, anthropic principle, parallel universes, etc. challenge the concept of objectivity in deference to subjective interpretation. The revelation that the experimenter is an integral part of the experience brings forward the realization that even the most quantifiable methodology must include and in some extreme cases foster, phenomena that could never be measured. By being engrossed in the demand for objectivity science has without realizing it, entered into the portal of design.
The concepts that surround subjectivity demonstrate that there are circumstances that exist within the context of consciousness that are also both meaningful and purposeful. In retrospect objectivity appears to function within the context of being more of a sounding board in response to subjective interpretation. Unbeknownst to the scientific paradigm it has become the vanguard that has unceremoniously acknowledged the importance of design.
Meaning has proven itself a difficult concept to fathom especially when attempting to discover and/or understand its relationship to reality. We habitually exercise and emphasize the position that the world is composed solely of opposites, e.g. hot/cold, light/dark, good/bad. Meaning seems to find its way into this dichotomy due to our emotions and how we feel about things to be a dominant filter in how we “objectively” perceive the world.
Meaning doesn't seem to have a contrasting element to better describe it than purpose. Meaning generally implies that the world is viewed in a heartfelt manner. We believe ourselves being capable of privately understanding the concept of meaning due to a concert of emotions we "feel" we share with others. At first glance purpose appears constant and unchangeable while meaning seems to be in constant flux. Even meaninglessness possesses its own kind of emotion that attempts to make its influence known in a world of objectivity.
Every event and every experience seems to support a "presence" in the form of both a meaning and a purpose, i.e. an observer rather than a perceiver who actively participates in the drama of the moment. I know I exist because I have the capacity to realize it … now! I know I have meaning. I know I have purpose. I know design. Life is the process, i.e. the sounding board, the theater that manifests before my awareness as a series of experiences that reveal intimate “observations” into my character and part in the play.
The "mind" has a problem when attempting to explain through reason alone the meaning and purpose in support of both the character and the play. Similarly, meaning cannot be explained merely in terms of emotion and feelings. Meaning like purpose permeates consciousness and is instrumental in recognizing its own reality within the constraints of the role afforded it. Its purpose: to enhance the capacity to reach beyond the illusionary power of the mind.
Meaning is an integral ingredient of the intuition. Meaning adds fragrance to the workings of the mind's challenge of bringing balance and direction to 3D space/time. The intuition crosses borders, penetrates the unknown and is an essential tool of every observer. To fully experience and bring meaning to the character requires an exercise of the intuition. In order to perform this task the intuition both consciously and subconsciously embraces every event and experience in a meaningful fashion. These associations can then be made apparent by means of design.
In essence, design describes how experiences are interpreted symbolically, i.e. events that are configured to describe what is interpreted as real. At first glance design appears to be arbitrary because consciousness/design has no meaning other than the meaning we prescribe to it. Design locates itself between events by creating meaningful and purposeful threads that weave the images that together tell the story (experience).
The relationships between meaning and purpose are always changing in addition to the context in which every event appears and is made conscionable. The only position that appears to be relatively constant * is the “observer” who actively witnesses the phenomenon either as a single event or series of events occurring in respect to a contextual background. Consciousness gives us the ability to package these experiences and make them real if we choose to do so.
In order to know the meaning and purpose in support of an event or experience it becomes imperative that we look to the cluster of smaller events that symbolically surround and contribute to it. One must investigate the contextual field in which these experiences occur, including any peripheral events and experiences that at first glance appear to be "unrelated".
Design lies dormant and hidden in the unknown until symbolically presented before consciousness in the form of an experience or event. In pursuit of a higher order of consciousness we can begin to learn and understand the realities presented to us by embracing a design consciousness. This alludes to accepting a position that is constantly changing in reference to a contextual field that is doing the same yet somehow allows us to meaningfully interpret patterns of energy, light and information that symbolically penetrate our lives through a veil of illusion.
The purpose behind design and our inherent ability to symbolically interpret our world is not entirely about outward appearances, i.e. form, but rather the expansion of awareness. What are the qualities of our character that we have willingly clothed and given expression? What are the garments we have created in support of our role in quest of expansion, i.e. growth in knowledge?
We are here to design, create and give expression to that which veils the unknown in order to let it be known, i.e. made manifest in 3D space/time. We are here to design for ourselves and others, to bring into fruition the loftiest of motives supporting our role in the play of life. All that is created is symbolic in character, a design that strives to bring attention to the unknown by means and process of knowing. To be made aware by means of creative expression is just one of the purposes of the design function.
The design process is the process of change. Life’s experiences afford the opportunity to modify and restructure the way we interact with the universe. What is learned and experienced is designed to be apparent and assimilated into consciousness in a new and unique fashion by means of the creative act. When the ramifications of change make their most appropriate inroads into consciousness the results are absorbed and exercised through design thinking. Creative thought requires observation from every perspective, which is a deliberate exercise that encourages change.
Design requires one to be an observer, i.e. to be detached while simultaneously aware and sensitive to the meaning and purpose of every event and experience. By means of design intentions become apparent, observed and eventually revealed. To remain the observer is a challenge due to the tendency to interpret the universe from one perspective. Reality projects every point of view in a symbolic manner and in a fashion that vibrates about a pre-determined universal template.
The relationship between the observer and what is being observed is fundamentally a subjective and emotional experience. Emotions are driven by desire and dependent upon the circumstance. Position and perspective remain a matter of choices based upon these variables. An appropriate use of knowledge, i.e. to know yourself and your true intention, allows for access into the meaning and purpose surrounding your own consciousness.
Subjective and Objective Meaning
It’s impossible to deny the fact that each of us have a personal knowledge and understanding of what meaning means to us. We know what we mean when we interpret the events that appear in our daily lives. And it’s from this same position that we rationalize their meaning. Individually we know what we mean in a way that no one else could ever fully understand; its from this same perspective that we create an internal dialogue with the “outside” world. The sense of permanence that supports this internal conversation describes our determination to bring meaning into our lives, whether it appears rational or not. We each possesses a very powerful and intimate kind of “knowing” that interprets and colors our perspective of life and reality. We strive to bring life into harmony and balance what we desire and think we know. We are each designed accordingly.
However, all events and experiences are also externally perceived and objectively measured. The fact remains that only through interpretive measures can consciousness overcome the constraints inherent to form and formlessness. Design is the force that through the active use of the symbol links consciousness together. The relationship, i.e. dialogue, between the internal observer and external perceiver is constantly redirecting one’s perspective in this ever changing now.
For something to be meaningful it must be significant. For something to be meaningful it must be important, have value and a purpose. Meaning gives relevance to an ever-changing observer whose conversation is entirely focused upon an internal discourse with one self.
Aristotle was the first to give a meaning to the term "telos", which is a belief that all events are somehow brought together for a purpose. In Greek the term telos means “end”. When one purpose is resolved another replaces it. One ending is only the beginning of another. All events and experiences come together for a purpose, which may be of greater meaning than the original intention. An objective once reached is replaced with another which together reach a goal, i.e. telos. Consciousness cannot take into account any event or experience without taking into consideration both its purpose and its meaning.
There aren’t any tangible causes to substantiate the concepts that surround life, rather telos stresses its meaning in somewhat of a reasonable fashion. This "life purpose" appears as an unclear urge, desire and determination to expand in the knowledge of an unknown harbored within. Telos relies on our imagination to substantiate and add value to the internal dialogue thereby proving that there is a purpose and a meaning in support of every event and experience.
* Even the concept of an “observer” is dominated by change and is used in this case to bring relative stability to the argument.
Footnotes:
- Cline, Austin, Teology and Design, Your Guide to Agnosticism/Atheism, Is there Design in the Universe that Proves God Exists?, http://atheism.about.com/od/argumentsforgod/a/design.htm
- Basden, Andrew, On Meaning, The Dooyeweerd Pages, http://www.isi.salford.ac.uk/dooy/meaning.html
- Sajadi, Ronnie, The Dual Meaning of “Meaning”, http://www.philosophy.ubc.ca/prolegom/backissues/paper/Sajadi.htm
www.ramtha.com, www.jzkpublishing.comavid
- Bohm, David, “Exploration Into the Meaning pf the Word “Meaning”, from a seminar conducted by David Bohm in Ojai, CA, Dec. 1-3, 1989. http://www.ratical.org/many_worlds/K/meaning.html
- English 233: Introduction to Western Humanities – Baroque and Enlightenment, Glossary of Terms: Telos, Teleology and Explanation. http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~lyman/english233/g-teleology.htm copyright 1999 by Lyman A. Baker.
- Frankl, Victor E., Man’s Search for Meaning, Simon & Schuster, Inc., First Printing English Translation 1959 – Third Edition 1984, http://www.cognitivebehavior.com/theory/telosresponsibility.html
* * *
Notes on Teleology
http://www.cognitivebehavior.com/theory/telosresponsibility.html
Aristotle formulated the first and original meaning of TELO “that for the sake of which”.
Telos means aim, end, or fulfillment. It is the opposite of cause. Causality asks, “Who started it?” Teleology asks “What’s the point?” “What’s the purpose?” It conceives events are aimed towards a goal and gives logic to life.
Telos (or purpose) doesn’t usually appear as a clearly formed goal, but more like a troubling, unclear urge coupled with a sense of unquestionable importance. It give s limited, specific reason for the sake of which we perform our actions.
Teleology causes a person to imagine every action to be purposeful, but does not state an overriding purpose to action in general, that would be finalism. The idea of telos gives value to what happens by regarding each occurrence as having purpose and gives events value.
Existential: refers to 1. Existence itself, specifically the human mode of being, 2. The meaning of existence, 3. The striving to find a concrete meaning in personal existence, i.e. the will to meaning.
Fatalism says, “It just doesn’t matter”. ”Heroism says, “… integrate those shadows and put disaster behind you and get on with your life. It has a purpose and place to move to. Teleological finalism says, “it all has a hidden purpose and belongs to your growth.”
Frankl suggests that we can discover our own telos, i.e. meaning in life by: 1. Creating a work or doing a deed, a way of accomplishment or achievement that should be quite obvious, 2. By experiencing something or encountering someone like truth, beauty, goodness, experiencing nature, culture or the uniqness of another human being by loving them. 3. By the attitude we take toward unavoidable suffering, compassion. When we are no longer able to change a situation, we are challenged to change ourselves.
According to Seligman, purpose is tied directly to organized and non-random actions. The creation of telos, meaning, purpose or goals could be considered thoughts. Thoughts are things; ideas projected into form, partaking in the nature of the thinker and occupy space in mental fields.
Baar says every conscious event is shaped by a number of enduring unconscious systems he calls “mental contexts” that shape conscious experience, access and control without itself becoming conscious (what do I know?) Contexts are unconscious systems that evoke and shape conscious experience. It is the ground against which new events are defined.
Inspire the will to meaning and a telos to which a person can be responsible, recognize an obligation, which involves decision-making, which identifies to what we are responsible. Accept limitations. You cannot be responsible for everything.
"http://ascensionhealth.org/ethics/public/issues/teleology.asp"
From the Greek, telos,, meaning “end” a type of ethical theory that evaluates human actions according to their final causality or ultimate end
Teleology and Science
http://www.personal.ksu.edu/~lymna/english233teleology_and_science.htm
To investigate the teleology of something in archeology is to try and figure out the various chains of means and ends that dictate or must have dictated its particular material and formal properties (what its made out of, what shape these materials have been given and how these are assembled.
Political scientists, sociologists, economists, psychologists, historians, prefer to talk about the function of the elements they isolate rather than the purposes of them; a functional analysis rather than a teleological explanation. They are more interested in the role of things rather than the purposes for which they were designed. Looking at what can legitimately be assigned to a designer as opposed to things that are the product of a complex history of circumstances. (note how the change in perspective concerning how we view artifacts can change the intention of the designer)
Between the 16th and 17th century teleological explanations were banished from the precincts of science except human artifacts. Once considered “divine science” it has now changed. Copernicus’ view of the universe as compared to Ptolemy included what he hypothesized what God would have built ( more simple universe and not as complex as Ptolemy’s) He used a teleological explanation.
Newton excluded all considerations of teleology from his explanation of the universe. Don’t need to know how come these scientific principles are true in order to know that they are true. Explanations of the metaphysical sort more natural phenomenon add nothing to our understanding of their behavior.
Hypotheses are human constructs, tools for accomplishing particular purposes. Instruments are human artifacts, fashioned to accomplish particular aims.
Glossary of Terms:
http://www-personal.ksu.edu/~lymna/english233/g-teleology.htm
The Greek term telos means “end” and is used in two distinct senses: that which terminates something and the goal to which some activity is directed or the purpose which some object or institution is designed to accomplish.
The two are connected the second being derived from the first. The Romans used the term finis, which had the same interpretation. Teleological explanation specifies the purpose or end of some made object is designed to serve. Aristotelian scholastic philosophy called a final cause. Must be taken into account when explaining an artifact.
This naturally includes the intention of the maker the specification of telos is essential to the concepts because we can give no adequate account without taking into consideration what the artifact is for. A mere description is doomed to fail.
Teleological explanation refers to two distinct things, 1. Elucidating why something has the (material and formal) properties it exhibits by pointing to the purposes it is designed to serve, or 2. Inferring the purposes something serves by examining the properties it exhibits.
* * *
* * *
Edited: 03.25.2013, 11.28.2013, 10.16.2014, 01.11.2017, 03.20.2018, 09.16.2019, 06.26.2022, 03.29.2023, 09.27.2023, 01.27.2024
