If we descend from the universal perspective to the perspective of a single species, is the view not the same? If we imagine each species as being as a single individual, would that being not desire only to continue existing? Would that individual species not mirror the universal by developing new adaptions to the environment, seeking to spread its range and enhance its survival? At the species level, again, it is only the survival of the species that matters. The individual which constitutes the whole is essential only as far as it contributes to the survival of the whole. The species abstracted as an individual seeks to survive and is yet made up of mortal beings. So, to continue to exist, the beings within it must reproduce for the species to survive. This conclusion implies that the purpose of the species is the same as that of life universal if only more specific. While life universal seeks only for life to continue, the species abstracted seeks only for the species to survive. The only way that a species can survive is via successful reproduction. What do we mean by successful reproduction? We mean the production of healthy offspring who survive to reproduce themselves.
How each species and the individual beings that make up those species achieve this grand purpose are as different as the individual species are from each other. With reproduction, some beings such as aphids or quaking aspen trees effectively clone themselves. Others such as many fish lay eggs and have thousands of young surviving through numbers alone. Still others, such as most mammals, have small numbers of young and care for them for extended periods of time. Each species also approaches the survival of their members to allow for successful reproduction in diverse ways. Some species opt to survive alone, others form complex social groups with kin, while others have developed a symbiotic relationship with other species. However, as different the means may be, the purpose is the same, to continue life through successful reproduction.