Chris, you seem so upset by my doubts that I hesitate to continue,
but will briefly.
   Life is diverse and its relations complex, but it does not 'work
so well' or even 'so badly.',  because it isn't at work for some end,
not even 'survival.'  Things live, breed, die, and patterns emerge.
   A 'teleological principle' usually involves a Director of Ends,
but you may be able to suggest a mechanism to accomplish end-making
without a Director. If not, the resemblance to creationism, which
most biologists do ignore or laugh at in their spare time, is clear.
   Take a simple case of the complex event: account, say, for an
8-fingered ancestor whose progeny have 5 fingers, from a teleological
perspective.
   Or simpler-- account for the dominant lifeform on this planet,
bluiegreen 'algae' (cyanobacteria) as means to an impersonal end.
   We can then see if your model is too fast, or too perfect, or
otherwise false to facts.
   Never be TOO accepting of statistical critiques of phenomena; they
nearly always leave out parts that resolve perceived problems.
LeComte de Nuoy, for example, is still quoted by folks not acquainted
with statistical pitfalls, long after his notions were found faulty.
   And Ms Vos Savant's column commonly features earnest attempts by
trained statisticians to refute her answers to seemingly simple
questions, when it's quite clear to her and to me that she's right,
as she proves.  This does not stop the next flood of replies.