And G-d said to Abram, “Go forth from your native land and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you.” (Genesis 12:1)
I. Introduction
Physics stands as the cornerstone of modern science, offering fundamental laws that govern matter and energy throughout the cosmos. Its equations describe the dance of subatomic particles and the orchestration of galactic systems with remarkable precision. However, a profound dichotomy exists in our universe: the distinction between inanimate and living matter. While physics masterfully explains the behavior of lifeless matter, it falls conspicuously silent when confronted with the defining characteristic of life itself—purposefulness.
The reductionist assertion that biology can be fully explained through chemistry, and chemistry through physics, while technically true, obscures a fundamental gulf in our understanding. This gap lies not in the mechanical workings of biological systems, but in their inherent purposefulness—a quality entirely absent from the equations of physics. Living organisms exhibit teleological behavior, acting with intent and purpose, while inanimate matter merely follows physical laws passively.
The philosophical pendulum has swung dramatically since Aristotle placed teleology at the heart of natural philosophy. Modern science’s wholesale rejection of teleological thinking, while methodologically useful, has left us without a framework for understanding purposeful behavior in living systems. This gap between our scientific and philosophical understanding finds an unexpected bridge in the Torah wisdom—specifically, in the Torah portion of Lech Lecha, which presents what I term “the imperative of purpose.”
II. Go to You—the Imperative of Purpose
The opening phrase of this portion—lech lecha (לֶךְ-לְךָ)—presents an intriguing linguistic puzzle. This apparent redundancy of the root word (LCh) carries profound significance. While traditional commentators offer various interpretations—Rashi’s “for your benefit,” Abarbanel’s “by yourself,” and the Midrash’s emphatic “Go, go!”—the Kabbalistic tradition penetrates to a deeper meaning: “Go to your inner self.”
In support of this Kabbalistic interpretation, I’d like to note that the gematria (numerical value) of the words lech lecha is 100.[1] In Kabbalah, the number 100 points to a full array of interincluded sefirot (divine emanations). Since we have ten sefirot, and each sefirah includes all ten sefirot, we have 10 × 10 = 100 total combinations of sefirot. Ten sefirot manifest in the human soul as ten powers of the soul (koḥot hanefesh)—three intellectual faculties and seven emotional attributes. The full array of 100 combinations of these powers of the soul represents the ultimate fulfillment of human potential, which is life’s goal. Thus, by telling Abraham, “Go to you,” G‑d commanded Abraham to pursue his goal relentlessly—to achieve his ultimate potential, his mission. The Torah’s command to Abraham—“Go forth from your native land and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you”—presents what we might term “the imperative of purpose.”
III. Teleology
Purpose is arguably one of the most underappreciated concepts in contemporary science and philosophy. In modern discourse, especially within the scientific community, the notion of purpose or teleology is often sidelined or dismissed. However, this was not always the case. Historically, the concept of purpose was central to understanding the natural world and human existence.
Aristotelian Teleology
In antiquity, Aristotle placed purpose at the forefront of his philosophical system. His concept of teleology (from the Greek telos, meaning “end” or “purpose”) posits that all things have an inherent purpose or final cause (causa finalis). Aristotle argued that everything in the universe has a specific function or goal toward which it naturally strives (Aristotle, trans. 1984).
In his work “Physics,” Aristotle delineates four types of causes: material, formal, efficient, and final. The final cause represents the purpose or end for which a thing exists. For example, the final cause of a seed is to become a fully grown plant. This teleological perspective suggests that objects and organisms are not merely passive entities but active agents with intrinsic purposes.[2]
Aristotle’s teleology influenced various fields, including biology, where he studied the functions of living organisms, ethics, where he explored the purpose of human life, and metaphysics, where he examined the ultimate causes of being (Aristotle, 1984).
Teleology in Medieval Thought
In the Middle Ages, Aristotelian teleology was further developed and integrated into theology. Theologians saw the universe as a grand design, with every creature and object having a specific purpose ordained by G‑d. This divine purpose was seen as the ultimate final cause, guiding the development and trajectory of the universe. For instance, the existence of humans was understood as part of a divine plan, with their ultimate purpose being to know and serve G‑d. Medieval Jewish philosophy, influenced by Aristotelian thought, embraced teleology as a fundamental principle. Philosophers like Maimonides (trans., 1963) incorporated teleological concepts into their understanding of the universe and its purpose. They saw the world as a harmonious system, with each element having a specific role and function.
The Enlightenment and the Decline of Teleology
The Enlightenment period saw a decline in the prominence of teleological explanations. Philosophers like René Descartes (trans. 1985) and Isaac Newton (trans. 1687/1999) emphasized mechanistic explanations, focusing on efficient causes and natural laws rather than final causes. However, teleological thinking persisted in certain areas, particularly in biology. Natural theologians like William Paley argued that the complexity and design of organisms pointed to the existence of a divine creator (Paley, 1802).
In the 19th century, Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution by natural selection proposed a radically new perspective on the apparent design in nature. According to Darvin, organisms evolve towards greater complexity and adaptation, driven by natural selection (Darwin, 1859).
In contemporary science, especially biology and physics, teleological thinking is often viewed with skepticism. While biologists recognize that organisms exhibit complex functions, explanations are typically framed in terms of genetic, biochemical, and evolutionary mechanisms rather than inherent purposes. The concept of teleonomy has been introduced to describe goal-directed processes resulting from natural selection without implying conscious purpose (Mayr, E., 1974). “Purpose” became a dirty word in biology, dominated by dogmatic evolutionary thinking. The notion of purpose is generally absent in physics, which focuses on describing natural phenomena through laws and equations that do not invoke goals or intentions. Some scientists argue that invoking purpose introduces unnecessary metaphysical assumptions that are not empirically testable. As a result, terms like “purpose” and “design” are often avoided or used metaphorically.
Re-evaluating the Role of Purpose
Despite the marginalization of teleology in science, some philosophers and scientists advocate for a re-examination of purpose in understanding complex systems. Discussions continue about the role of purpose-like explanations in biology, particularly in areas like developmental biology and systems biology (Kauffman, 1993).
Critics of the strict exclusion of purpose argue that it limits our understanding of life and consciousness. They suggest that a more nuanced approach could bridge the gap between scientific explanations and the intuitive sense of purpose observed in living systems (Nagel, 2012).
IV. The Gap Between Inanimate and Living Matter
Inanimate matter evolves passively according to the laws of physics. According to Newton’s First Law of Motion, an object at rest remains at rest, and an object in motion continues in uniform motion unless acted upon by an external force (Newton, 1687/1999). When forces are applied, as per Newton’s Second Law, objects change their motion proportionally to the applied force, but this change is an unintentional passive response, not driven by any purpose or goal.
In thermodynamics, the Second Law states that entropy, a measure of disorder, tends to increase in an isolated system (Clausius, 1865). This means that inanimate matter naturally progresses toward greater disorder over time. Structures break down, some atoms and subatomic particles decay, energy disperses, and systems move toward equilibrium.
In contrast, living matter defies this passive progression toward disorder. Living organisms actively maintain and even increase internal order, exhibiting behaviors that are purposeful and goal-oriented. Every living cell pursues several fundamental purposes:
- Maintaining Internal Homeostasis
- Survival
- Growth
- Reproduction
- Transmission and Replication of Genetic Information
1. Maintaining Internal Homeostasis
Internal homeostasis refers to the process by which a living organism regulates its internal environment to maintain a stable, constant condition necessary for survival (Cannon, 1932). Living cells actively monitor and adjust their internal conditions, such as temperature, pH, ion concentrations, and nutrient levels. They employ complex mechanisms involving sensors, feedback loops, and molecular pumps to maintain optimal conditions for biochemical processes (Bernard, 1865/1957).
Inanimate matter does not regulate itself. It passively undergoes changes imposed by external forces and the progression toward increased entropy (disorder). A rock does not attempt to maintain its structure against erosion; it simply erodes.
While the Second Law of Thermodynamics dictates that entropy must increase in an isolated system, living organisms are open systems. They exchange energy and matter with their environment, importing low-entropy resources (like nutrients) and exporting higher-entropy waste products. This allows them to maintain or even decrease internal entropy without violating thermodynamic laws (Schrödinger, E., 1944).
2. Survival
Survival is the drive to continue existing by avoiding harm and fulfilling essential needs. Living organisms exhibit behaviors aimed at preserving their existence. This includes seeking food, avoiding predators, repairing damage, and adapting to environmental changes (Darwin, 1859).
In contrast, inanimate objects do not exhibit a desire to survive. They do not seek to prevent their own destruction or alteration.
3. Growth
Growth is the process by which organisms increase in size and complexity. Through cell division and enlargement, organisms grow, developing new structures and functions. Growth requires the synthesis of complex molecules and the organization of cells into tissues and organs (Alberts, et al., 2015).
In contrast, inanimate matter does not grow or develop new capabilities. While crystals can increase in size under certain conditions, this process lacks the purposeful direction seen in biological growth.
4. Reproduction
Reproduction is the production of new individuals from existing ones. Organisms reproduce to ensure the continuation of their species. This can occur asexually (e.g., mitosis in single-celled organisms) or sexually (involving genetic recombination). Reproduction involves intricate processes that accurately duplicate genetic material and cellular structures (Watson, J. D. & Crick, F. H. C., 1953).
In contrast, inanimate objects do not reproduce. An electron does not create new electrons; an inorganic molecule does not reproduce itself.
5. Transmission of Genetic Information
The transmission of genetic information is the copying and passing of DNA from one generation to the next.
DNA replication is a highly regulated process ensuring that offspring inherit genetic material from their parents. This allows for the preservation of species traits and contributes to evolution through genetic variation (Mendel, 1866/1965), (Watson, J. D. & Crick, F. H. C., 1953).
In contrast, no analog in inanimate matter exists for the precise and purposeful transmission of complex information seen in biology.
6. Teleology in Living Systems
The purposeful behaviors observed in living organisms are collectively referred to as teleological—they are goal-directed and intentional. Aside from the five goals encoded in every live organism outlined above, this teleology is evident in:
- Adaptive Responses: Organisms adjust to environmental changes to maintain homeostasis (Cannon, W. B., 1932).
- Complex Organization: Biological structures exhibit intricate organization far beyond what is found in inanimate matter (Alberts, et al., 2015).
- Information Processing: Cells process information through signaling pathways and genetic regulation (Jacob, & Monod, 1961).
Challenges to Physical Explanation
While physics explains the fundamental forces and particles, it does not inherently account for intentional behavior, purpose, or goals. Attempts to reduce biological phenomena entirely to physics often fall short. The claim that life exhibits emergent properties that arise from, but are not predictable solely by physical laws (Anderson, 1972), is unsupportable. A purpose or goal cannot be considered an an emergent property; it must be imposed from outside the system.
The sheer complexity of biological systems involves levels of organization (cells, tissues, organs) beyond the scope of physics alone (Kauffman, 1993). While mathematical complexity can emerge from simple systems, such as cellular automata, this does not automatically translate to the mind-bending complexity of live organisms. Moreover, complexity alone does not produce life—life requires a purpose, or five, to be precise.
Living organisms act as agents with intentionality—making choices to achieve goals—which is not a concept within physics.
Thermodynamics and Life
The apparent contradiction between the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the decrease in entropy within living organisms is resolved by recognizing that organisms are not isolated systems. By consuming energy (e.g., food, sunlight), they maintain internal order at the expense of increasing entropy in their environment (Schrödinger, 1944).
However, the intentional expenditure of energy to decrease entropy locally in order to maintain homeostasis is highly purposeful and meaningful. Someone designed a refrigerator to lower the temperature inside its wall and, when it rises above the pre-set level, to activate the motor that circulates the coolant inside, extracting the heat and channeling it outside into the ambient air. This refrigerator is carefully designed to decrease the entropy inside without violating the Second Law of Thermodynamics. Similarly, a cell measures the concentration of oxygen, nutrients, and ions. If they rise or fall outside the normal range, molecular pumps positioned in the cellular walls are activated to either take in specific chemicals when low or expel them from the cell when high. A living cell is a highly sophisticated and intelligent apparatus with multiple sensors, feedback loops, actuators, and other machinery to maintain homeostasis—the normal and stable environment inside the cell. And it actively operates in a highly intelligent and purposeful manner—nothing like we see in the inanimate matter. Laws of physics fail to describe this behavior.
The Question of Purpose
The purposeful nature of life raises profound questions:
- How did purpose-driven behavior arise from inanimate matter? It is a logical impossibility because purposefulness is not an emergent phenomenon. From where did the purpose (or goals) come? To people of faith, the answer is obvious—it could only come from G‑d. This remains a mystery for scientists who do not consider this possibility.
- The existence of purpose in living organisms touches on philosophical debates about the nature of life and consciousness (Nagel, 2012), which also appear to be irreducible to emergent phenomena.
The distinction between inanimate and living matter highlights a fundamental gap in our understanding of the universe. While physics provides powerful tools to describe the behavior of inanimate objects, it does not fully explain the intentional, purposeful, goal-directed behaviors of living organisms. Biology introduces concepts like homeostasis, adaptation, and reproduction, which involve teleology absent in physics.
Purposefulness rules the living world. The Torah teaches us to go to ourselves, that is, to the purpose that we are destined to fulfill. It is imperative to live a purposeful life.
V. The Land that I Will Show You
Returning to the Torah portion Lech Lecha, the imperative “Go” is followed by “to the land that I will show you.” What is that land, and how is this goal connected with the mission of self-fulfillment discussed above?
The two goals are intertwined. Every soul comes down to Earth with a mission to extract specific sparks of godliness buried in the material world. By divine providence, every soul has a connection to specific sparks it is destined to redeem. Abraham’s mission was to acquire the land of Canaan for himself and his descendants. Therefore, we can only achieve our ultimate fulfillment in a specific place where our sparks are buried.
In Kabbalah, the number 100 also hints at the sefirah of Keter. Whereas all other lands are under the dominion of the sefirah of Malḥut, the land of Israel—at that point, the land of Canaan—is the only land that is under the dominion of the sefirah of Keter. Thus, by telling Abraham to “Go to you,” G‑d not only imbued him with a purpose of personal fulfillment but also commanded him to go to the land of Canaan, which will belong to his children. Jewish people—children of Abraham—are connected to the land of Israel, bequeathed to them by G‑d. This is where we can reach our ultimate potential, our destiny. This is the hint contained in the numerical value of the words lech lecha.
The expression “to the land that I will show you” from the Torah portion Lech Lecha contains a profound hint about the nature of purpose.
VI. Defining Purpose Through Phase Space and Entropy
A few years ago, reflecting on the teleology of life, I sought to define purpose rigorously in scientific terms and arrived at the following conceptualization.
In physics, systems are described by assigning a state to each system. The state refers to a complete description of the system at a particular moment in time, encompassing all its properties. These properties depend on the type of system and the context of the study. Mathematically, it is convenient to represent a system’s state as a point in phase space—an abstract, multidimensional space where each dimension corresponds to one of the system’s variables.
In classical mechanics, phase space is defined by position and momentum coordinates. By plotting a system’s trajectory in phase space, we can visualize its evolution over time. This powerful tool is instrumental in various fields of physics, from quantum mechanics to statistical mechanics, for analyzing complex systems and understanding their underlying dynamics (Goldstein, et al., 2002).
Similarly, in biology, phase space represents the possible states of a biological system. Each axis corresponds to a different variable characterizing the system. For example, in Population Biology, variables might include population size, resource availability, and predation pressure.
In cell Biology, axes could represent gene expression levels, protein concentrations, metabolic fluxes, or signaling pathway activities. The state of a cell at any given time is a point within this phase space. As the cell undergoes biological processes, its state changes, tracing a trajectory through phase space. Analyzing these trajectories provides insights into cellular dynamics, different cell states, and responses to environmental stimuli (Alon, 2007).
Purpose as a Low-Entropy State in Phase Space
I propose defining a system’s purpose as a specific state or region in phase space characterized by minimal entropy. This state is not where the system currently is but a target state toward which the system naturally tends. Entropy, in this context, is a measure of disorder or the number of possible microstates corresponding to a macrostate (Boltzmann, 1877). A highly ordered, unique state has lower entropy than more probable, disordered states.
The purpose represents a unique state with lower entropy because fewer configurations correspond to it. The system gravitates toward this low-entropy state, expending energy to reach it, much like a refrigerator consumes energy to lower internal temperature, decreasing entropy locally (Schrödinger, E., 1944).
Homeostasis as Oscillation Around the Purpose State
In practice, systems often oscillate around this ideal purpose state due to internal and external fluctuations. The system may overshoot its goal, overcorrect, and continue oscillating around the purpose state. This is a state of dynamic equilibrium.
In biological systems, maintaining internal stability (homeostasis) involves staying within a narrowly defined region in phase space surrounding the purpose state (Cannon, 1932). As long as the system remains within this region, it functions optimally, achieving its goal of stability and efficient operation.
The Biblical Metaphor of Purpose
The Torah portion Lech Lecha offers a metaphor aligning with this concept: G‑d’s command to Abraham, “Go to yourself… to the land that I will show you” (Genesis 12:1), can be interpreted as a directive to seek a specific, divinely designated state or destination.
The land represents not just a physical location but a metaphorical region in phase space—a special, low-entropy state chosen by G‑d. This land is unique—the Holy Land—and its uniqueness corresponds to minimal entropy in our analogy. Because the location is designated by G‑d, it emphasizes the special nature of the purpose state.
Abraham’s journey parallels a system’s trajectory through phase space toward its purpose state. Just as Abraham must expend effort and navigate challenges to reach the land, a system must expend energy to move toward and maintain its low-entropy purpose state. The land being shown by G‑d underscores that the purpose state is significant and not arbitrary—a state of optimal functioning and harmony.
Reading the Torah portion of Lech Lecha convinced me that not only does the Torah imbue us with a purpose, but it also hints at the scientific definition I came up with a few years ago.
VII. Conclusion
The synthesis of Torah wisdom with modern scientific understanding reveals a compelling framework for understanding purpose in both living systems and human existence. The imperative of lech lecha transcends its historical context to offer a profound insight into the nature of purpose itself—one that bridges the gap between physical law and teleological behavior.
This framework not only provides a mathematical foundation for understanding purposes in biological systems but also illuminates the deep connection between scientific truth and spiritual wisdom. The journey to one’s purpose, like Abraham’s journey to the promised land, represents movement toward a unique state of minimal entropy—a state of optimal functioning and profound meaning.
Bibliography
Alberts, B., Johnson, A., Lewis, J., Morgan, D., Raff, M., Roberts, K., & Walter, P. (2015). Molecular Biology of the Cell (6th ed.). Garland Science.
Alon, U. (2007). An Introduction to Systems Biology: Design Principles of Biological Circuits. Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Anderson, P. W. (1972). More is different. Science, 177(4047), 393–396. https://doi.org/10.1126
Aristotle. (1984). The Complete Works of Aristotle: The Revised Oxford Translation (J. Barnes, Ed.). Princeton University Press.
Bernard, C. (1957). An Introduction to the Study of Experimental Medicine (Greene, H. C., Trans.). Dover Publications.
Boltzmann, L. (1877). Über die Beziehung zwischen dem zweiten Hauptsatze der mechanischen Wärmetheorie und der Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung respektive den Sätzen über das Wärmegleichgewicht [On the relation between the second law of the mechanical theory of heat and the calculus of probabilities with respect to the theorems on thermal equilibrium]. Sitzungsberichte Der Kaiserlichen Akademie Der Wissenschaften in Wien, 76, 373–435.
Cannon, W. B. (1932). The Wisdom of the Body. W. W. Norton & Company.
Clausius, R. (1865). Ueber verschiedene für die Anwendung bequeme Formen der Hauptgleichungen der mechanischen Wärmetheorie [On several convenient forms of the fundamental equations of the mechanical theory of heat]. Annalen Der Physik, 201(7), 353–400.
Darwin, C. (1859). On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection. John Murray.
Descartes, R. (1985). The Philosophical Writings of Descartes (J. Cottingham, R. Stoothoff, & D. Murdoch, Trans.). Cambridge University Press.
Goldstein, H., Poole, C. P., & Safko, J. L. (2002). Classical Mechanics (3rd ed.). Addison-Wesley.
Jacob, F. & Monod, J. (1961). Genetic regulatory mechanisms in the synthesis of proteins. Journal of Molecular Biology, 3(3), 318–356. https://doi.org/10.1016
Kauffman, S. A. (1993). The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. Oxford University Press.
Maimonides, M. (1963). The Guide for the Perplexed (Shlomo Pines, Trans.). University of Chicago Press.
Mayr, E. (1974). Teleological and teleonomic: A new analysis (pp. 91–117).
Mendel, G. (1965). Experiments in Plant Hybridisation (Druery, C. T., Trans.). Harvard University Press.
Nagel, T. (2012). Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False. Oxford University Press.
Newton, Isaac. (1999). The Principia: Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy. University of California Press.
Paley, W. (1802). Natural Theology; or, Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity. J. Faulder.
Schrödinger, E. (1944). What Is Life? The Physical Aspect of the Living Cell. Cambridge University Press.
Watson, J. D. & Crick, F. H. C. (1953). Molecular structure of nucleic acids: A structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature, 171(4356), 737–738. https://doi.org/10.1038
Endnotes:
[1] לֶךְ (Lech) = ל (30) + כ (20) = 50; לְךָ (Lecha) = ל (30) + כ (20) = 50; 50 + 50 = 100.
[2] Other examples: a knife’s purpose is to cut; its design and structure are oriented toward this function, or the heart’s purpose is to pump blood throughout the body, sustaining life.
Leave A Comment