[Serious] Literal and Not Literal

[Anomalocaris]

The fundamental criteria is survival of the genes that underlies the trait in the individual undergoing selection somewhere in the gene pool.  I might give my life to save my sister because my sister likely bear most of the same genes as me.   So giving my life ensures genes similar to mine, including the one that encourages me to sacrifice myself for my sister, survive.   

Cute story bro, but we don't have  gene detecting genes, or even sister detecting genes, or even a "sacrifice myself for someone" gene.

You probably have to think a bit harder, about what type of gene and how it's expressed actually looks like? Love/Compassion, and its genetic makeup, is probably a good place to start. I'm willing to sacrifice myself for those i love and care about, even if they don't share my genes. I'd be more willing to risk my life to save my dog, than you, even though we share more in common genetically.

We also seem prone to feel more compassion for the innocent, defenseless, probably as a result the need for such compassion when raising children and babies. A mother more willing to die for the life of her child, than a grown brother. A man more willing to die for woman, than a grown man, etc...

It is the ability to account for the possibility that the objective of preserving their own direct gene line, which is the fundamental reason why there is instinct to preserve own life, does not necessarily provide the highest possible guaranty for the survival somewhere in the gene pool of genes defining one's own behavior, that facilitate the behavior you mention.

Evolution made it possible for humans to be convinced that the most fundamental objectives of survival, the survival of the genes underlying one's own behavior, is not necessarily best served by the survival of the individual in each circumstances.    It is sometimes best served by facilitating the survival of some perceived to have enough in common with us at the possible expense of our own survival.

No it didn't. We don't have gene detectors, let alone any favorability dependent on such gene detectors. It's not as if my sisters genetic makeup, gives off a distinct scent, that my brain subconsciously detects, and responds in ways favorable to insuring the survival of our mutual genetic makeup.

If I was switched a birth, I would be none the wiser.

Evolution paints in very broad strokes, and quite blindly. The fact that it favors reproduction and survival, is more or less just coincidental, because of the nature of the environment we find ourselves in, rather than the genes themselves. It's only because for most of us,  our primordial tribe is our family, those that share our genetic makeup benefit the most from such elements. Not because we're biological aware of those who share our genetic makeup the most.

Human beings, have a variety of unique features, that are more or less byproducts of evolution, rather than directly selected for, that creates a great deal of divergences, and evolutionarily unintended pathways. Our recognition of our own mortality, appears to be a byproduct of having rational/conscious minds, rather than a feature directly selected for.

I can perceive the significance of losing my mother, not just when I've lost her, but it contemplating her loss as well. I can conceive of being and not being. Contemplate the idea of dying, and even desire death over living as a result.

Our ability to recognize being and not being, is byproduct, but it's also the foundation of our dependency on meaning. Meaning isn't a disguise for survival, anymore so than any other byproduct is, and things that arise from them are. They're emergent elements.

And they produce their own unique set of challenges when it comes to our survival, that are not addressed by our genes. The awareness of death, of not being, needs an awareness of what keeps us planted on the platform, what we call "Meaning". The something to live for, rather than merely just surviving. Without it, our ancient brothers, in that dire world of the past, would probably have chosen collective suicide, when they learned that death was an option.

It's why we recognize that if our friends feel irresolvabley hopeless, or see life as irresolvabley meaningless, that we should probably get them some help before they jump off the platform. Creature unaware of the concept of the death, will just go on living, no dog will line up to be euthanized.

Your profoundly obtuse wit is charming.   But no one so profoundly obtuse is going to be my bro, bro.

We absolutely have many gene detecting genes, bro.   That’s why you, hopefully, instinctively don’t feel too strong of an natural urge to fuck monkeys or donkeys when looking at their genitals.   Another example is despite cultural influences, it appears members of all cultures instinctively and universally privilege certain specific phenotypical traits in forming assessments of perspective mates because these traits statistically correlated to less genetically based congenital issues, or negatively correlated to gene which reduce fertility.

Do we have genes for a built in remote gene sequencing machines?  No.  But don’t be obtuse.  We have all sorts of genes that drive instinctive behavioral tendencies which serves to condition us to behave according to specific phenotypical expressions in those whom we interact with, phenotypical expressions which are correlated to statistically advantageous genotypes. 

In other words, gene that detect other genes through traits correlated to those other genes, much in the same way lie detectors detect lies through elevated blood pressures correlated to lies.  We do have gene detectors built in.