The Myth of Meaning: 5 The End of Ends — Teleology Without a Telos

The Problem

Even in secular accounts, meaning often implies ends: goals, purposes, or ultimate destinations. From evolutionary narratives to ethical frameworks, we act “toward” something, as if the cosmos itself were oriented to deliver significance.

The Distortion

This is teleology reborn: a secular echo of divine providence. By framing meaning as inherently goal-directed, we treat relational processes as if they were designed for outcomes. Human projects, cultural evolution, or scientific progress are imagined as fulfilling pre-existing plans, masking the contingency and perspectival nature of actualisation.

The Relational Alternative

In a relational ontology, ends are not pre-inscribed; they emerge through perspectival construal. Goals are patterns we detect and enact, not cosmic mandates. Significance arises from interaction, negotiation, and alignment — it is the relational actualisation of potential, contingent on context and perspective. There is no telos external to the process.

Takeaway

Teleology without a telos exposes secular thinking’s hidden inheritance: purpose imagined as property of reality. Relational meaning dissolves this illusion, showing that what we call ends are emergent patterns within ongoing processes, not preordained destinations.