748:- thanks for the reply. I think your are right -- while a link to the work being talked about is nice, and what the article says about them may be right, supporting what the article says about the works needs a cite to third party commentator. I'll try a bit, caveat I'll try to find what is usually said per WEIGHT and what is here might not have any supports online. And that my take on this is slightly different than the article -- I see it as talk about physics, at least at root that motions and changes proceed towards some endpoint. (stones fall to earth, acrons grow into oaks) and Aristotle was trying to explain how things change, and that folks still expllain things by reference to their purpose. Cheers
1161:): is "polemic morass" a term of art in cosmology or ontology? A cosmological/ontological sense isn't obvious, so an indication of what it means here would be helpful. Is the proposition that the "... chief instance, and the largest polemic morass, of teleological viewpoint in modern cosmology and ontology is the teleological argument that posits an intelligent designer as a god" verifiable? Without a reference, it looks like original research. Can anyone help, please? ---
534:
518:
502:
580:
590:
562:
263:
235:
219:
338:
949:- Not me, at least not much. To clarify, by "obviously the lead could be rewritten" I meant only there were many ways to phrase things and choices of what to say and illustrated with a plausible but fairly different one. I might skip out on doing a full rewrite though, and go more for cutting any bits not further supported by the article body. Cheers
404:
369:
414:
1114:
This section is wholly devoted to Ludwig von Mises (and his controversial "science" of praxeology), whose historical figure is not specified (Austrian, libertarian, right wing, heterodox, etc. could all be used). It also omits any discussion of Marx's historical materialism, which drew on Hegel's
722:
A number of the other claims appear to cite primary sources as well, and although I'm less familiar with economics, it seems that even the connection of this metaphysical topic to an entire other field of study should rely on more direct attributions of
780:
Noting TALK has no section for discussion and the article seems to have no action for that tag, and no specifics about where it differs from MOS or accessibility, I have put in this section. The template does not explicitly call for it and so the
882:
718:
At the very least, the "History" and "Modern philosophy" sections only cite primary sources, which especially in the case of Plato and
Aristotle can't possibly be sufficient, given that "teleology" as a discipline is a later
803:, and trying to keep content focused about the philosophy aspects -- but with such a randomly crafted alternative I have no idea if it is addressing whatever concern and I tail off is anything to say towards the bottom.
726:
I would also remind you that "no work being done" is not a reason to remove a tag. And in this case I believe the tag is still unquestionably valid given the state of the
History section, so it shouldn't be removed.
699:
Please contribute, e.g. by describing your concern with some specifics further than the edit comment "it would be difficult to name a single predicate in this article that originated from a reliable source".
300:
153:
920:
you really don't need to ping me about this, you've been here a while, so I assume you are competent and capable of reading the MOS and determining for yourself what was wrong, as per your statement that
693:
where it says "Note: This template should not be applied without explanation on the talk page, and should be removed if the original research is not readily apparent when no explanation is given."
788:
Please contribute, e.g. by describing your concern with some specifics further than the edit comment, perhaps suggested content or detailing critiques of specific locations with reasoning.
928:
I tag articles that appear to me to have issues, so that improvements can be made to them. If you make improvements, and you believe the issues are no longer valid, you may remove the tag.
1277:
1282:
435:
on
Knowledge (XXG). If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the
1115:
teleological philosophy of history and has been of far broader historical consequence than Mises. It finishes with external links to articles on a wiki devoted to Mises.
1272:
294:
147:
509:
379:
472:
1292:
652:
79:
1247:
658:
616:
541:
387:
1237:
462:
689:
Noting TALK has no comment and the article seems to have no action for that tag, and no specifics about the concern, I have put in this section per the
525:
383:
1010:
Those seem enough to consider as providing the requested lead rewrite -- I'm not getting into non-lead items as those would be different threads, e.g.
785:
guide about when to remove a tag does not explicitly say this is cause for removal, but it does look like a lack of edits and/or talk page discussion.
993:
moved into the
Science section the para mentioning current debate on use - there is summary note of it in the second para, no need for detail in lead.
1252:
437:
85:
1262:
624:
1297:
1242:
1232:
30:
1192:
that they either (believe that they) know or (believe that they) don't know which answer to that question is true. This isn't any kind of
1267:
620:
427:
374:
1287:
1116:
99:
44:
628:
604:
567:
104:
20:
1257:
1069:
editorial remark about creationists that seems misplaced in this article (and telos "end" is not the same as design "mechanism")
696:
I'm thinking that if the concern hasn't gotten any involvement, then it might as well be removed, but wanted to try this first.
74:
986:
moved into a See Also the one-line para mentioning Kant (as UNDUE or not enough of article content to justify lead mention per
349:
65:
1076:
But again those are not part of this thread topic so for now do you think the lead rewrite tag to be removed ? Cheers
315:
168:
974:- I have made those cuts to the lead, please examine and see if you agree that LEAD REWRITE tag should now be removed.
282:
135:
185:
109:
1213:
1065:"Modern Philosophy" tagged for expansion seems to need a cut instead as it is not philosophy, but just a oneline
901:, teleology is used to describe where psychological norms are dependent on at least in part on functional norms.
199:
1139:
190:
355:
823:
of a thing or event. A teleology holds that there is a final cause or purpose coming either from within, an
1120:
832:
819:, directive principle, or finality in nature or human creations. It is one of Aristotle's descriptions of
276:
129:
1166:
1049:
820:
55:
1095:
1081:
954:
910:
866:
853:
753:
708:
983:
in philosophy (versus as a form of phrasing) and remove odd/long "which serves as" phrasing in the line
791:
I think obviously the lead could be rewritten --and will offer the below from a google then looking at
70:
1091:
1077:
950:
906:
897:
view that an action's ethical right or wrong is based on the balance of good or bad consequences. In
749:
704:
272:
125:
1209:
1158:
218:
337:
245:
1135:
1033:
308:
161:
1185:
933:
886:
828:
824:
732:
322:
204:
175:
782:
1057:
1162:
1134:
Why is deontology even part of this article? Deontology is not a teleological ethical theory.
1045:
1037:
419:
51:
1197:
987:
874:
201:
841:
800:
595:
1066:
1201:
1029:
894:
870:
777:
with the edit comment "lead should be rewritten to follow MOS and be more accessible".
288:
141:
533:
517:
501:
1226:
1053:
1041:
971:
946:
929:
878:
849:
845:
770:
745:
728:
680:
1189:
1205:
1176:
The wording is a simple sum of parts, an adjective describing a noun: the area of
241:
1020:
690:
589:
1181:
898:
812:
585:
432:
409:
792:
1177:
1016:
980:
890:
579:
561:
24:
796:
615:-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us
1193:
862:
611:
816:
431:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to
240:
Graphs are unavailable due to technical issues. There is more info on
203:
403:
368:
1204:
it, one would need to point to an aspect of teleology that is more
1019:
should be less a quotefarm and get mention teleology as one of the
848:
tradition in philosophy. It's rationale was explored in detail by
808:
1217:
1170:
1143:
1124:
1099:
1085:
958:
937:
914:
757:
736:
712:
331:
257:
229:
213:
205:
15:
1196:
at all, let alone original research; on the contrary, it is
979:
rephrased first line to start with saying it as a branch of
532:
516:
500:
1090:
Having no reply to the contrary, I will remove the tag.
1208:
than it: subject to greater polemics. There isn't one.
774:
684:
307:
160:
1023:, then History should also mention some other history
609:, a project to improve Knowledge (XXG)'s articles on
483:
321:
174:
835:, which views nature as lacking design or purpose.
773:- in August 2022, a LEAD REWRITE tag was added by
657:This article has not yet received a rating on the
33:for general discussion of the article's subject.
840:Historically, teleology may be identified with
1278:Mid-importance philosophy of religion articles
867:teleological argument for the existence of God
923:I think obviously the lead could be rewritten
8:
441:about philosophy content on Knowledge (XXG).
1283:Philosophy of religion task force articles
683:- in April 2022, an OR tag was added with
556:
480:
363:
1188:exists and how humans satisfy themselves
1273:C-Class philosophy of religion articles
831:. It is traditionally contrasted with
558:
365:
335:
922:
447:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Philosophy
7:
1293:Unknown-importance Religion articles
1015:"History" section seems deficient -
637:Knowledge (XXG):WikiProject Religion
601:This article is within the scope of
425:This article is within the scope of
1248:Mid-importance metaphysics articles
354:It is of interest to the following
23:for discussing improvements to the
1238:Mid-importance Philosophy articles
893:, teleology is used to describe a
14:
50:New to Knowledge (XXG)? Welcome!
869:was used in the 13th century by
588:
578:
560:
412:
402:
367:
336:
261:
233:
217:
45:Click here to start a new topic.
1253:Metaphysics task force articles
1184:is the question of whether any
1110:Economics section needs rewrite
1036:to prove the existence of God,
811:meaning end or purpose) is the
807:Teleology (from the Greek word
467:This article has been rated as
450:Template:WikiProject Philosophy
1263:Mid-importance ethics articles
1100:12:37, 29 September 2023 (UTC)
1086:15:26, 20 September 2023 (UTC)
1:
1298:WikiProject Religion articles
959:19:42, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
758:19:36, 2 September 2023 (UTC)
640:Template:WikiProject Religion
42:Put new text under old text.
1243:C-Class metaphysics articles
1233:C-Class Philosophy articles
938:21:56, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
915:21:38, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
737:20:49, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
713:20:19, 31 August 2023 (UTC)
1314:
1268:Ethics task force articles
1125:01:11, 10 March 2024 (UTC)
766:Discuss LEAD REWRITE tag ?
659:project's importance scale
473:project's importance scale
1288:C-Class Religion articles
1157:section (contributed by @
1144:01:00, 1 April 2024 (UTC)
877:, in the 18th century by
656:
573:
540:
524:
508:
479:
466:
397:
362:
80:Be welcoming to newcomers
1218:21:23, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
1171:20:58, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
833:philosophical naturalism
627:standards, or visit the
1258:C-Class ethics articles
1032:use in the fith of his
873:in his best known work
484:Associated task forces:
1050:Mechanism (philosophy)
542:Philosophy of religion
537:
521:
505:
428:WikiProject Philosophy
344:This article is rated
75:avoid personal attacks
1155:Teleological argument
854:Critique of Judgement
536:
520:
504:
348:on Knowledge (XXG)'s
100:Neutral point of view
1186:intelligent designer
827:or from outside, an
605:WikiProject Religion
105:No original research
1034:Five Ways (Aquinas)
453:Philosophy articles
887:watchmaker analogy
829:extrinsic finality
825:intrinsic finality
617:assess and improve
538:
522:
506:
438:general discussion
350:content assessment
86:dispute resolution
47:
1190:epistemologically
1038:Sir Francis Bacon
815:study of design,
673:
672:
669:
668:
665:
664:
643:Religion articles
631:for more details.
555:
554:
551:
550:
547:
546:
420:Philosophy portal
330:
329:
256:
255:
252:
251:
212:
211:
66:Assume good faith
43:
1305:
1180:most subject to
1058:Kant's teleology
883:natural theology
875:Summa Theologica
645:
644:
641:
638:
635:
629:wikiproject page
598:
593:
592:
582:
575:
574:
564:
557:
491:
481:
455:
454:
451:
448:
445:
422:
417:
416:
415:
406:
399:
398:
393:
390:
371:
364:
347:
341:
340:
332:
326:
325:
311:
265:
264:
258:
237:
236:
230:
226:Daily page views
221:
214:
206:
179:
178:
164:
95:Article policies
16:
1313:
1312:
1308:
1307:
1306:
1304:
1303:
1302:
1223:
1222:
1210:Quercus solaris
1159:Quercus solaris
1151:
1132:
1112:
881:in his text on
842:Aristotelianism
768:
678:
642:
639:
636:
633:
632:
596:Religion portal
594:
587:
489:
452:
449:
446:
443:
442:
418:
413:
411:
391:
377:
345:
268:
262:
234:
228:
208:
207:
202:
121:
116:
115:
114:
91:
61:
12:
11:
5:
1311:
1309:
1301:
1300:
1295:
1290:
1285:
1280:
1275:
1270:
1265:
1260:
1255:
1250:
1245:
1240:
1235:
1225:
1224:
1221:
1220:
1150:
1149:Polemic morass
1147:
1136:Captchacatcher
1131:
1128:
1111:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1088:
1074:
1073:
1072:
1071:
1070:
1062:
1061:
1046:René Descartes
1030:Thomas Aquinas
1025:
1024:
1003:
1002:
1001:
1000:
999:
998:
997:
996:
995:
994:
991:
984:
964:
963:
962:
961:
941:
940:
926:
903:
902:
871:Thomas Aquinas
858:
857:
837:
836:
767:
764:
763:
762:
761:
760:
740:
739:
724:
720:
677:
676:Discuss OR tag
674:
671:
670:
667:
666:
663:
662:
655:
649:
648:
646:
600:
599:
583:
571:
570:
565:
553:
552:
549:
548:
545:
544:
539:
529:
528:
523:
513:
512:
507:
497:
496:
494:
492:
486:
485:
477:
476:
469:Mid-importance
465:
459:
458:
456:
424:
423:
407:
395:
394:
392:Mid‑importance
372:
360:
359:
353:
342:
328:
327:
266:
254:
253:
250:
249:
238:
224:
222:
210:
209:
200:
198:
197:
194:
193:
181:
180:
118:
117:
113:
112:
107:
102:
93:
92:
90:
89:
82:
77:
68:
62:
60:
59:
48:
39:
38:
35:
34:
28:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1310:
1299:
1296:
1294:
1291:
1289:
1286:
1284:
1281:
1279:
1276:
1274:
1271:
1269:
1266:
1264:
1261:
1259:
1256:
1254:
1251:
1249:
1246:
1244:
1241:
1239:
1236:
1234:
1231:
1230:
1228:
1219:
1215:
1211:
1207:
1203:
1199:
1195:
1191:
1187:
1183:
1179:
1175:
1174:
1173:
1172:
1168:
1164:
1160:
1156:
1153:Refer to the
1148:
1146:
1145:
1141:
1137:
1129:
1127:
1126:
1122:
1118:
1109:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1089:
1087:
1083:
1079:
1075:
1068:
1064:
1063:
1059:
1055:
1054:Immanuel Kant
1051:
1047:
1043:
1042:Novum Organum
1039:
1035:
1031:
1027:
1026:
1022:
1018:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1011:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1006:
1005:
1004:
992:
989:
985:
982:
978:
977:
976:
975:
973:
972:User:Carchasm
970:
969:
968:
967:
966:
965:
960:
956:
952:
948:
947:User:Carchasm
945:
944:
943:
942:
939:
935:
931:
927:
924:
919:
918:
917:
916:
912:
908:
900:
896:
892:
888:
884:
880:
879:William Paley
876:
872:
868:
864:
860:
859:
855:
851:
850:Immanuel Kant
847:
846:Scholasticism
843:
839:
838:
834:
830:
826:
822:
818:
814:
813:philosophical
810:
806:
805:
804:
802:
798:
794:
789:
786:
784:
778:
776:
772:
771:User:Carchasm
765:
759:
755:
751:
747:
746:User:Carchasm
744:
743:
742:
741:
738:
734:
730:
725:
721:
717:
716:
715:
714:
710:
706:
701:
697:
694:
692:
687:
686:
682:
681:User:Carchasm
675:
660:
654:
651:
650:
647:
630:
626:
622:
618:
614:
613:
608:
607:
606:
597:
591:
586:
584:
581:
577:
576:
572:
569:
566:
563:
559:
543:
535:
531:
530:
527:
519:
515:
514:
511:
503:
499:
498:
495:
493:
488:
487:
482:
478:
474:
470:
464:
461:
460:
457:
440:
439:
434:
430:
429:
421:
410:
408:
405:
401:
400:
396:
389:
385:
381:
376:
373:
370:
366:
361:
357:
351:
343:
339:
334:
333:
324:
320:
317:
314:
310:
306:
302:
299:
296:
293:
290:
287:
284:
281:
278:
274:
271:
270:Find sources:
267:
260:
259:
247:
246:MediaWiki.org
243:
239:
232:
231:
227:
223:
220:
216:
215:
196:
195:
192:
189:
187:
183:
182:
177:
173:
170:
167:
163:
159:
155:
152:
149:
146:
143:
140:
137:
134:
131:
127:
124:
123:Find sources:
120:
119:
111:
110:Verifiability
108:
106:
103:
101:
98:
97:
96:
87:
83:
81:
78:
76:
72:
69:
67:
64:
63:
57:
53:
52:Learn to edit
49:
46:
41:
40:
37:
36:
32:
26:
22:
18:
17:
1163:Frans Fowler
1154:
1152:
1133:
1117:104.57.64.23
1113:
904:
790:
787:
779:
769:
702:
698:
695:
691:tag template
688:
679:
619:articles to
610:
603:
602:
468:
436:
426:
356:WikiProjects
318:
312:
304:
297:
291:
285:
279:
269:
225:
184:
171:
165:
157:
150:
144:
138:
132:
122:
94:
19:This is the
1206:contentious
1092:Markbassett
1078:Markbassett
1040:counter in
1021:Four causes
951:Markbassett
930:- car chasm
907:Markbassett
895:utilitarian
821:four causes
750:Markbassett
729:- car chasm
705:Markbassett
510:Metaphysics
380:Metaphysics
295:free images
242:Phabricator
148:free images
31:not a forum
1227:Categories
1182:polemicism
1130:Deontology
899:psychology
444:Philosophy
433:philosophy
375:Philosophy
1178:teleology
1017:Aristotle
981:Causality
891:bioethics
793:Britanica
775:this edit
685:this edit
88:if needed
71:Be polite
25:Teleology
21:talk page
1194:research
1060:, etc...
1028:such as
863:theology
844:and the
801:Stanford
783:WP:WTRMT
723:sources.
634:Religion
612:Religion
568:Religion
388:Religion
186:Archives
56:get help
29:This is
27:article.
1202:falsify
1198:WP:BLUE
988:WP:LEAD
905:Cheers
852:in his
817:purpose
719:notion.
703:Cheers
471:on the
346:C-class
301:WP refs
289:scholar
244:and on
154:WP refs
142:scholar
889:. In
526:Ethics
384:Ethics
352:scale.
273:Google
126:Google
1200:. To
1067:WP:OR
925:...."
809:telos
797:wikis
316:JSTOR
277:books
169:JSTOR
130:books
84:Seek
1214:talk
1167:talk
1140:talk
1121:talk
1096:talk
1082:talk
1056:and
955:talk
934:talk
921:"...
911:talk
885:and
865:, a
754:talk
733:talk
709:talk
623:and
621:good
309:FENS
283:news
162:FENS
136:news
73:and
1048:in
861:In
799:or
795:or
653:???
625:1.0
463:Mid
323:TWL
176:TWL
1229::
1216:)
1169:)
1142:)
1123:)
1098:)
1084:)
1052:,
1044:,
957:)
936:)
913:)
756:)
735:)
711:)
490:/
386:/
382:/
378::
303:)
156:)
54:;
1212:(
1165:(
1138:(
1119:(
1094:(
1080:(
990:)
953:(
932:(
909:(
856:.
752:(
731:(
707:(
661:.
475:.
358::
319:·
313:·
305:·
298:·
292:·
286:·
280:·
275:(
248:.
191:1
188::
172:·
166:·
158:·
151:·
145:·
139:·
133:·
128:(
58:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
