Which of the following points weakens Aristotle's concept of purpose in existence?

Aristotle's concept of purpose, or "telos," posits that everything in the universe has a specific end or purpose that it is designed to achieve. This idea is foundational to his biological and ethical views, asserting that the natural world is structured in such a way that all entities have an inherent purpose informing their existence and functioning.

The idea that some things may exist without a purpose directly challenges this core tenet of Aristotle's philosophy. If certain entities can exist without any inherent purpose, it undermines the universal applicability of Aristotle's teleological framework. For instance, if there are things that exist solely by chance or that do not contribute to a larger purpose, it suggests that not all existence is directed toward an end goal, which contradicts Aristotle's assertion that everything has a telos.

In contrast, other points such as the belief that everything has a purpose or that all senses are reliable affirm Aristotle's perspective. The notion of God not being involved in the material world introduces a different dimension regarding divine purpose and involvement but does not weaken the fundamental assumption that individual entities possess their own purposes. Thus, the point highlighting the possibility of existing without purpose effectively serves to challenge the foundational aspects of Aristotle's philosophical framework.