Model of hierarchical complexity: evolution is not teleological

Continuing from this post, Lane's part 4 of the essay contains links to the first 3 parts. A dominant theme in his critique is Wilber's use of animism and intelligent design inherent to evolution. But what stages of development see evolution this way? Even though I have criticisms of the model of hierarchical complexity, this article looks at how the term 'evolution' is viewed at different levels. E.g.:

"The hierarchical complexity view is that [...] the processes of evolution do not favor any particular organism, any particular order of hierarchical complexity, or any particular degree to which a given order is present. This view is a behavioral analytic support of the Darwinian view that there is no inherent teleology that favors 'higher.'" 

Interpreting evolution as animistic or intelligent design is using what the article calls 'downward assimilation,' how lower levels interpret higher concepts. Wilber himself in another context called this the lower appropriating the higher.