In his recent paper "Indeterminacy, empiricism, and the first person" John R. Searle tries to refute Willard V. O. Quine's famous "indeterminacy of translation thesis" by arguing that this thesis is in fact a reductio ad absurdum of Quine's own "linguistic behaviorism". Searle accuses Quine of being "antimentalistic" and suggests that the "absurdity" of Quine's thesis might be avoided if a full-fledged "intentionality" were tolerated in the debate on meaning. - This anti-Quinean approach in some respects reminds of the "improbable (...) debate" between Searle and Jacques Derrida ten years ago, when Derrida had split and "deferred" intentionality by showing that the essential "iterability" of signs inevitably infects every intentional act with an unremovable "non-presence". In this paper it is argued that Searle's attacks on Quine and Derrida have both failed - and that there are structural similarities between these two failures which reveal some interesting parallels between Quine's and Derrida's philosophy. (shrink)

By means of a survey of the papers given at the XIX Symposium of theSociety for History of Sciences on the „Idea of Purposiveness in the History of the Sciences“, Mai 28–30, 1981 in Bamberg, West Germany, it is demonstrated that in the course of the history of science teleological thinking in its traditional form is increasingly eliminated from the sciences. This process culminates in the attempt to rehabilitate teleological thinking by means of a reconstruction of Aristotelian philosophy using the (...) tools of modern natural science. The question arises whether this signifies the end of teleological thinking or a new direction of genuinely teleological thought. (shrink)