Objections

Your framework is just-so storytelling and is not actually falsifiable.

In a deterministic Logos, the 'Navigator' is just a passive rider on a predetermined track.

You explain the function of consciousness, but not the "raw feeling" of what it is like (The Hard Problem).

Hume’s Guillotine: You cannot logically derive a prescriptive 'Ought' from a descriptive 'Is.'

Without a transcendent source or a God, life in an impersonal Archē is meaningless.

Your framework justifies Social Darwinism by baptizing evolutionary success as 'moral.'

You cannot prove other minds exist, so your social and moral framework is built on sand.

If 'what is' is a necessary expression of the Archē, your system leads to a passive acceptance of injustice.

You cannot prove your first principles or the external world with absolute certainty; therefore, your system is built on sand.

Consciousness and morality might just be "spandrels"—non-adaptive byproducts of evolution with no real functional utility.