Also technically an impossibility, since evolution would not be possible without extinction
To be human is to have emotions, being sentimental is one type of emotion you can feel. Especially if you feel like Earth is currently being overrun and destroyed by humanity at breakneck speeds. To feel emotional about this OK, as long as you also stay grounded and realistic.
But we should not hide our emotions, it's possible to be both emotional and rational.
Just like arriving onto a crime scene and yelling at the crying survivors to shut up, without any consideration for the crime committed before, or any of its consequences.
and yet almost every selection mechanism can only operate on phenotypic forms. The nature of a "species" is a shorthand for "sufficiently distinctive phenotype(s) that evolution will operate distinctly on this group of individuals", and in this sense, "species" do matter.
> Extinction of traits in favor of better ones is baked in to the very definition.
I don't know what definition you're talking about, but this also completely wrong. Evolution can generate new traits without old ones vanishing, and that can be true whether the new ones have higher or lower fitness than the old. Evolution is a change generation mechanism primarily; selection is a secondary mechanism and at various times and places, selection pressure can be extraordinarily weak, allowing a large diversity of traits to coexist.
If we don't get society under "control" - and not through the ideological-tyrannical effort underway globally currently - but through voluntarily taking action through adequate organization of listening to and following competent leadership (voting with our dollars, say by buying a Tesla vehicle, etc) - then we'll probably destroy most humans/life on Earth anyhow and whatever survives will be able to continue to evolve; and maybe, if any humans remain, they'll be wise enough to pass on and successfully counter tyrannical forces that exist within the human genome.
Extinction happens, and, more broadly, death happens. However, we don't stand and deliver a eulogy composed of "idk, people die, no big deal" at a family member's funeral. Immense loss imparts grief.
From all I can see is you incorrectly simplified what I said to a strawman argument of '"idk, people die, no big deal"'.
The reality is over the last 10+ years, without going into any details, I've been working towards and exponentially being closer and closer to helping humanity survive and change course as quickly and efficiently as possible; the current issue is a lack of adequate communication and organization, and properly designed tools, systems, and protocols - along with most major existing systems having been captured partly or fully by bad actors who seem hellbent on destabilizing society to prevent them from being held accountable, as well an attempt to gain full control over everything and everyone.
But being a realist is important if the odds are unknown, like how Elon is aiming for and where all signs point to him being successful creating a colony on Mars far sooner than later as a backup plan, backup site for humanity - when even 5 years ago that wasn't even on anyone's radar; seeing exponentials, as Elon has said, are very difficult for people to see - but that is where hope, along with automation and technology leveraged and utilized for good, in the right organization for the right purposes, is what can very quickly right the spaceship called Earth; unimaginably quickly - that even those who see and setup these systems following foundational principles will be surprised by their speed of development and uptake.
I wasn't making a straw man, or simplifying, I was pointing out a lack of recognition that said grief is kind of the topic at hand.
Side note, saving humanity on Mars is cool and all, I'm totally for it, but in the event that actually happens, all of an entire planets lives and ecosystems will be destroyed. Exploration is aspirational, but, as a "backup plan," Mars is an incredibly bleak and sad future to rely on.
Buying a Tesla is not going to save the climate. Not even if everyone does it. We need transportation options that scale. That means density, bikes, buses, trains. It means anything except personal 2+ ton motor vehicles.
I'd counter that tyrannical forces actually spurs humanity in the right direction. I say this because I have notice over the years that our species have been dealing with this problem since the birth of mankind. This is an observation, not a plug for tyranny.
We've been in a yin-dark ages cycle, relatively slow moving, and will be moving into yang cycle - fast, exponential change. The technological innovation and distribution of technology via automation and capitalism has overlaid the relative stagnancy of this current cycle making it appear to not be a dark age, when clearly, with any critical analysis things are far worse than they could or should be.