In this blog post, we will logically examine why humans can be regarded as “advanced beings” within the context of natural selection and the course of evolution, and how the ability to understand natural selection functions as a trait advantageous for survival across diverse environments.
In the 19th century, Charles Darwin proposed the theory of evolution based on natural selection. He observed that species possessing traits suited for survival gain a greater advantage in survival and reproduction compared to those without such traits, and that these traits are passed down to the next generation, causing the gene pool to change. This process is natural selection, and the phenomenon where accumulated changes in the gene pool of a biological population lead to alterations in the characteristics of the entire population or the emergence of new species is defined as evolution. Although the theory of natural selection and the core mechanisms of evolution appear simple at first glance, the implications embedded in this theory and the inferences derived from it are highly nuanced and complex, giving rise to a variety of possible interpretations. The long-standing debate over whether evolution constitutes progress or merely an increase in diversity also stems from these differing interpretations.
Scholars such as Dawkins, who view evolution as a form of progress, have interpreted it as such because traits that help organisms adapt better to their environment gradually accumulate over successive generations. Indeed, the fact that increasingly complex life forms emerged over time on the primordial Earth, which was once dominated by bacteria, gave the impression that evolution possesses a directionality toward increasing complexity. Consequently, the interpretation that evolution is a progressive phenomenon characterized by an increase in complexity was proposed.
However, Gould and other scholars do not agree with the claim that evolution is directional. They argue that natural selection produces only changes that adapt to the immediate local environment, and that viewing any evolutionary pathway as superior or attributing a directionality to it in this process constitutes an overinterpretation. Nevertheless, Gould explains that the reason biological complexity appears to increase over time is because life began with bacteria, which possess the simplest structures.
Gould described the minimal complexity arising from the conditions of the spontaneous generation of life as the “left wall.” Living organisms had no choice but to start from this position of minimal complexity, and because of this, the direction in which biological diversity could increase and expand was inherently open in one direction. Therefore, it can be explained that the increase in the complexity of living organisms is not due to an inherent directionality, but rather an inevitable result stemming from the structural constraints of the starting point.
So, is evolution progress, or an increase in diversity? In this article, I would like to present another perspective. While evolution is fundamentally an increase in diversity, I wish to argue that humans, at least, are “advanced beings.” The reason is that humans understand the principle of natural selection itself, and this understanding functions as a unique trait that is advantageous for survival across all environments. To support this, two points must be demonstrated. First, why can the fact of understanding the principle of natural selection be viewed as a trait that aids survival across all environments? Second, how can such an understanding be considered a trait possessed by a species?
First, I will examine why understanding the principle of natural selection is advantageous for survival across all environments. In *Full House*, Gould explained that natural selection deals only with adaptations to local environmental changes and does not imply general progress. This is generally a valid argument. For example, there is no hierarchy between the Arctic fox, which has long fur and small ears to adapt to cold environments, and the desert fox, which has short fur and large ears to adapt to hot environments. The traits that are advantageous in each environment must necessarily differ, and therefore, evolutionary advantage varies depending on the environment.
However, the ability to understand natural selection and respond to it is a trait that is advantageous across all environments, unlike these examples. Let us examine this by comparing examples involving humans and other animals. The chytrid fungus inhabits the skin of amphibians, causing a fatal skin disease that impairs cutaneous respiration and has led to the extinction of many amphibian species, including the golden frog. Humans, too, have faced crises to their very existence due to numerous epidemics, such as the Black Death and smallpox. At the time, the Black Death reduced Europe’s population by more than half, and smallpox is estimated to have claimed over 300 million lives in the 20th century alone. However, humanity has continuously devoted itself to medical research to overcome these deadly diseases. As a result, smallpox has been completely eradicated, and with the development of antibiotics, the Black Death no longer causes global pandemics. This is a prime example of humanity overcoming the pressure of natural selection caused by disease through knowledge and technology.
Furthermore, as environmental problems have become more severe, humanity has sought to preserve the Earth’s environment by adopting agreements such as the United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification and the Vienna Convention for the Protection of the Ozone Layer. Additionally, from the perspective of species preservation, various systems have been established, such as the adoption of treaties banning chemical and biological weapons to prevent massive loss of life in war. Of course, it is undeniable that humans are the primary cause of environmental problems, but at the same time, humans are also the agents who recognize that these changes could adversely affect human survival and are attempting to self-correct. If humans were beings incapable of recognizing the dangers of environmental pollution, they would likely be remembered as a “species that failed to adapt to a changed environment and was eliminated by natural selection.” However, humans have grasped that environmental change is a matter directly linked to human survival and are taking actions to address it.
Combining these two examples, the ability to understand the workings of natural selection and respond to them can be considered a universally advantageous trait, unlike other evolutionary traits.
Next, let us examine whether the “ability to understand natural selection” can be recognized as a trait. For a characteristic to be considered a trait, it must be stably inherited; this ensures that the traits possessed by better-adapted individuals are passed on to the next generation, thereby bringing about changes in the gene pool. If only a single generation of humans understood the workings of natural selection and this knowledge was not passed on to the next generation, it would be difficult to view the human species as having evolved. However, humans can use language to clearly convey their thoughts and beliefs to others, and it is also possible to disseminate information unchanged through writing. Therefore, the human ability to understand natural selection can be stably transmitted across generations, and since it does not easily disappear once transmitted, it can be viewed as a trait.
Of course, two counterarguments can be raised. First, some may ask how this can be considered a trait unique to humanity when there are many people who do not know or understand evolutionary theory. Second, since the traits we generally think of are innate characteristics transmitted through genes—and since a child does not know evolutionary theory the moment they are born simply because their parents do—some argue that it is difficult to view an understanding of evolutionary theory as a trait.
Regarding the first point, although not every individual understands natural selection, natural selection and the theory of evolution are accepted as “facts” in human society today. In the 1986 Edwards v. Aguillard case, the U.S. Supreme Court did not recognize creationism as a scientific theory, and consequently, teaching creationism in U.S. public schools was prohibited. As such, most countries teach the concepts of evolutionary theory and natural selection in public education, rather than creationism. Therefore, even if not all members of humanity understand natural selection, the fact that human society recognizes evolutionary theory as a common fact can be viewed as a unique trait of humans that distinguishes them from other species.
In response to the second point, while knowledge of evolutionary theory is not directly inherited, humans naturally encounter evolutionary perspectives through education and interaction with society as they grow up. Modern society uses an evolutionary approach as the foundation for explaining biological phenomena, and this body of knowledge and educational structure is passed down through generations. Therefore, even if understanding of evolutionary theory is not innate, it can still be regarded as a trait.
The fact that humanity possesses traits that are advantageous for survival across all environments and can be stably transmitted serves as evidence supporting the claim that humans are advanced beings.
In this article, I have argued that while evolution is fundamentally an increase in diversity, humans are advanced beings. The basis for this claim is that humans possess a pan-environmental trait: the “ability to understand natural selection.” As Dawkins noted, evolution is not an “intended outcome.” As Gould emphasized, the accumulation of random events is a more plausible explanation. Until now, living organisms have been selected by chance events without even realizing that they were subject to natural selection. Humans, too, are a product of chance evolution. However, humans (and perhaps other beings capable of understanding natural selection that may emerge in the future) have come to understand the process that brought them into existence and have become aware of the mechanisms of natural selection and the existence of genes. Consequently, individuals are now acting while contemplating which direction they must take to avoid natural selection. If so, future outcomes can no longer be described as purely
accidental. Having secured even the smallest degree of autonomy within the realm of evolution—the ability to make choices—can we not say that humans are an advanced species?
