Evolution and Utility Maximization: A Synthesis

In the previous article, I touched on the theory regarding the relationship between our evolution and utility maximization. In this one, I'd like to present this theory in a more concrete manner.

Evolution is driven by what we today call the "survival of the fittest", which implies that those who are most well adapted to their environment are those that are able to persist and pass on their genes to their offspring. But this only answers part of the question. If evolution is driven by the survival of the fittest, what drives the desire to not only live on, but for those who possess superior faculties, to dominate those of lesser ability? To make it worth their while, fitter individuals must receive something for their troubles. This is where the concept of utility maximization enters the play.

All rational individuals seek to maximize their utility for as long a time period as their foresight allows them. Some individuals are naturally more short-sighted than others, so they seek to maximize only their short-term utility, while others think and optimize further ahead. Additionally, if we think of each individual's utility function as consisting of a very large number of differently weighted variables, we realize that everybody's variables and weights will be as diverse as the individuals themselves.

The vast differences in all these utility functions are precisely what drive the evolutionary mechanism. Everybody ultimately does what grants them the most utility within the time period that they can reasonably assess. If those actions that maximize their utility also happen to coincide with the actions required to survive and reproduce in their specific environment, then those individuals could be considered to be fit in the Darwinian sense. In that same sense, it can almost be said that for every environment, there exists a form of utility function that fares best. The closer a person's function comes to this, the better off he'll be within that setting. The genes of these individuals are what are eventually passed down from generation to generation.

To some degree, this interpretation is similar to Adam Smith's "Invisible Hand". Each individual only does what is natural for him to gain the greatest amount of utility, not necessarily thinking about survival, evolution, or the larger scope of humanity. However, arising from this interaction of everybody doing what is best for themselves, comes the very battle for survival that Darwin had envisioned. As Smith's invisible hand guided everybody to make the decisions that benefited total welfare, solely by making the decisions that best benefited themselves, so does the evolutionary invisible hand extract and pass down the most successful genes solely through each individual's personal utility maximizing actions.