A teleological existence is like the kid that doesn’t want to take a bath. His mom takes him to the tub kicking and screaming under her arm and as soon as the dirty deed is done he goes right out and dives into the nearest pile of dirt. The probability the kid ends up in the bathtub is nearly whole. It may appear the existence of the tub and the act of cleaning him up determines his behavior but these objects and the sequence of events, although predictably patterned, do not determine the outcome.
One thing we know for sure, the kid is destined for the bathtub.
Scientists see patterns of existence that tend to predict the outcome. A dirty kid, a mom, and a bathtub is likely to have the kid in the tub, which suggests the tub exists to have the kid in it. Science, however, is all about ontology. It is “wrong” to assume the tub exists to determine the value of its use, but when it comes to risk, always existing “probably” in the futures, we naturally tend to assume its avoidance, yielding to predictable patterns.
