In the printed version, there is unfortunately an error that I corrected in this web-version (in which I have retained a few expressions of the original draft). I think this error is funny, so here is the story:
In my draft for the entry, I wrote the sentence "However, as the informational teleology of computer programmes is derived, qua being designed by humans to achieve specific goals, the teleology and informational characteristics of organisms are intrinsic, qua being evolved naturally through evolutionary processes". Evidently the draft was far from perfect, and the entry was improved editorially. One of the editorial queries to me was "Please clarify the term 'informational teleology' for non-specialist readers. Perhaps give an example or add a parenthetical definition." Thus, the sentence in the proofs was reformulated, and, following the expression 'informational teleology', I added in the margin this parenthesis, "(the goal-directedness based upon a stored informational code)". I don't think my handwriting is that bad, so first I was a bit surprised when I later had the printed encyclopedia in my hand and saw that this parenthesis had been interpreted as "(i.e., god-directedness based upon a stored informational code)".
- My God!, I thought. - But then, after all, maybe the error gave sense: It's an encyclopedia of science and religion, isn't it? And if few people can live with only "a god of the gaps" (as discussed in a separate entry of the volume), perhaps a god of the codes will do? Anyway, the encyclopedia also contains an entry on teleology for those who desire a more detailed explanation. Perhaps I should finally emphasize that the informational (or biosemiotic) teleology that is discussed in the writings of biosemiotics is a non-religious form of teleology, that is, a kind of functional goal-directedness of organismic process, or the final causation of sign action, or both.