Scientific status and fruitfulness of teleology as a philosophical, scientific and epistemological problem (on the example of the works of the neo-visualists H. Driesch, A. Gurvich and A. Lyubishchev)

Determining the relevance of teleology and vitalism as the principles of worldview and scientific explanation is now absorbing the minds of many scientists and philosophers, «natural scientists» and cybernetics. On the example of the works of three representatives of neo-vitalism of the early XX century, the author seeks to prove that both the modern «request» for teleological explanations and the emergence of works that critically repel old and new teleological speculations are generated by the unsatisfactory nature of previous assessments of teleological «movements» in the natural sciences, «epistemological weakness» of vitalism critics and neo-vitalism in biology. It is suggested that the transfer of criticism of teleology and vitalism to the context of the actual philosophical and scientific problems, the introduction of this criticism into the research field of ontology and the theory of knowledge could help solve the problem of determining the scientific status of teleology within the natural sciences.