I was thinking.
Ends are the emotionally satisfying conclusions in a play or story.
Most people believe the ends don't justify the means, yet curiously good endings can make the interlude bearable.
"The end" is often associated with the ripeness of time, action and purpose. Current philosophy of biology is debating to what extent discussion of an organism's teleology, or purpose, "is unavoidable, or is simply a shorthand for ideas that can ultimately be spelled out non-teleologically."
In evolutionary biology, endings ensure that the best of life can go forward. So while it codes for an end, death is also a species improvement strategy.
The arrow of time, suggests that time moves in one direction to many, many ends. One quantum theory suggests that time is retrocausal, which means it doesn't end. If so, time can be rerun and its effect observed before cause.
The end can also mark the logical consequence of a premise or the something for which an event took place, which raises an interesting question. In magic the logical consequence isn't. How does magic have an end?
And speaking of logical consequence, Kurt Gödel demonstrated that incomplete systems can be whole, but whole systems can never be completely logical.
Ends can have normative values. Wordnet suggests that "end" might also be the part you are expected to play, as in "he held up his end."
Good design brings its subject matter to a satisfying ending. Good ends must to some degree be experienced.
Interestingly, the "end" may not even necessarily be so: an end can also mean "remnant," an historically consequential idea with deep roots in the monotheistic traditions.
It can also mark a transition, or the beginning of something new, or signify the conclusion of one blog post.
Now can be an end.