Fictional though it may ultimately be, there’s something that profoundly bewitches intellects in such aspirationally complete future states and through which psychological and tribal identities endlessly and self-reflexively define themselves, invoking meaning as this undiscoverable (or unrecoverable) endpoint or perspectival projection and horizon.
After all, what better way to displace plausibly unmanageable complexity in the current moving moment and frame of reference than to assert that it all ties off nicely in a teleological endpoint that is always and already presupposed in language and narrative cognition as an unattainable destination that masquerades as inevitability? All systems of belief (or organisational philosophy) seem to possess similar metaphysical aspirations towards unrealisable closure, and yet we must build as surely as we must breathe.
Consensus is largely antithetical to that individualism and ego that anchors itself and its meaning (ergo purpose, validation) on a future vanishing point. I do wonder if all aspirations to system creation don’t also and inevitably find themselves unwittingly entangled in this idealised end-state.
I may have missed the point, bewitched as I am by linguistic introspection.