I've noticed a trend wherein "New Right" or "Alt-Right" individuals will try to win arguments through teleology instead of through tradition. What I mean by this is if someone makes arguments that are synonymous with what I'm going to call the "new left", for example "white people need to die" the response is often something like "wanting to live is rational, right?" Or if the slightly more moderate "white people need to stop breeding" line is used, the response might be "wanting to continue to exist is rational, right?" I think these are teleological arguments because they extrapolate our behaviors and desires (or, at least, a justification for them) from basic observations about the way the world works and what conclusions a person can draw from those observations. I think following such a thought process is both normal and reasonable (those on the "new left" might disagree) and the similarities between different traditions are probably attributable to the fact that teleology is a common starting point for philosophy or religion of any kind. At the same time, we might ask ourselves why teleology matters. Does it matter because of a presumption of a divine mandate or intentional design (which is the traditional presumption), does it matter because we want to understand people's intent (and therefore identify the existence of selfishness or malice, the latter concept barely being distinguishable from normal behavior today) or does teleology matter for some other reason? Although teleological arguments are useful from the perspective of trying to win an argument, which when dealing with the alt-left can unfortunately be synonymous with defending your basic goals of probity and survival, I think it is also useful for someone to ask themselves why they are interested in teleology and perhaps also what kind of teleology they find most fulfilling. To elaborate there, a teleology which takes Christ's resurrection literally might come to slightly different conclusions than one which builds a personal philosophy upon different presumptions. This next part will be a bit of a tangent but bear with me: lately I have been thinking about "mindfulness" meditations and "revolutions" of thought. Some of us are aware of the fact that the original definition of the word "revolution" didn't mean a transfer of power into a new order but referred to a circular motion. To provide an example of this circular motion in modern day, right now in the west it is popular to say #metoo about something like being sexually assaulted or raped. Those of us who are part of the "new right" movement will point out that telling people you were sexually assaulted is sometimes not constructive. This may be an example of a revolution of thought because these people are deluding themselves into thinking that sexual assaults can be ended or something, or that their hashtags are empowering or whatever. Eventually the reality will set in for them and they may go in the opposite direction, expecting that being quiet about it is the best recourse against sexual assault or is the more empowering choice but this may not be true either. People who can't accept that imperfections exist always look for a final solution and this leads them into "revolutions" whereas other people may see what is going on and seek a "center" that makes them immune to the percolations of these revolutions. What this has to do with mindfulness meditation is that being "mindful" of yourself is really just a starting point. Just as people or the masses go through revolutions of thought, I think it is possible for individuals do the same thing on a smaller scale. Once you are mindful of yourself you might start to recognize your own revolutions of thought and learning to intercept, redirect or otherwise recognize such things might be a route towards real happiness. This is also what can make teleological analysis useful because it can give a person insight into what they really value as a human being instead of merely accepting whatever the television or liberal arts professors told them they should value.
