Fallacy of teleology of design

“That’s not made for that” - Passerby pointing at the rail, commenting on me working on rail balance.

And the internet wasn’t designed by the Department of Defense for cryptographic records, and yet we have blockchain, nor for upturning financial systems, and yet we have cryptocurrencies, nor was it made to amplify our social nature, and yet we have social media. And onwards we march, towards web 3.0.

Nor was the body made for modern food nor our feet for shoes. Fingers weren’t made for spelling, much less for reading (braille). Whatever you’re doing with your body, after the age of 6 months, you can be sure it wasn’t “designed” for that.

The spine wasn’t made for expression. In fact, there is a whole class of structures/functions which the absence of doing non-designed things with causes a deterioration of. You sometimes have to use things in ways they weren’t intended, to maintain their capacity for general functionality.

One more: the breath was not made for focusing, the mind not made to be analyzed. And yet, what vista into the nature of consciousness they have opened for us. Maybe that speaks to the penultimate question, of what is the mindbody phenomenon for? Maybe it doesn’t matter.

None of this speaks to the “right” thing to do with a technology; the origin of the design doesn’t speak to whether it is right to use it for a purpose. That’s an illusion - the fallacy of teleology of design (a trap I walk into on a regular basis). Fate happens now, and we decide what things are “made” for, by using them for such.

What it was made for is a starting point, not an ending point. It may determine parameters which constrain future repurposing, vectors which determine what directions of growth are possible. Of course, mind the origins of the thing: It speaks to respect, ancestry, humility. Bind the sacredness of origin with the pursuit of complexity.

We should be careful about falling into this fallacy of the teleology of design - it applies just as much to the technologies around us as much as the technology which IS US.