Why Does Schwann Say Final Cause Is Not Important?

Why does Schwann say final cause is not important?
Aristotle says, “For the coming to be is for the sake of the being, but not the being for the sake of the coming to be.” (640a.20) When Harvey does observation of circulation of blood, he explains the function of every organ on the basis of theory that nature does nothing for vain and everything has its purpose for its existence. All readings we had so far suggest that teleological view is important for everything to exist in nature. But, Schwann suggests that according to physical laws, teleological view “is just as little explanation”. Furthermore, he states that physical laws operate the organic phenomena in accordance with strict law of blind necessity, and those physical explanations are more acceptable in the science.
What is the principle of Science? Why does Schwann think Science accepts the physical explanation but discards the teleological view? This paper aims to explore and analyze this paradoxical situation. In doing so, first, it will
He compares the course of development of the cells of cartilage and of the cells of the chorda dorsalis with that of vegetative cells. He observes the similarity in the formation of all the cell nucleus and nucleolus in all of them. He also finds similarity in the development of cell as he says that, “the similar situation of the nucleus in relation to the cell, the growth of the cells, the thickening of their wall during growth, the formation of cell within cells, and the transformation of the cell contents just as in the cells of plants”. The outer structure of cartilage and chorda dorsalis is highly different but the internal development of cell in them takes place in the same way. No matter how different they are in their physiological sense, the growth in their elementary particles takes place by following the common principle of