Our brain did not evolve to do anything. It happened that a scaled primate brain is useful for DNA propagation, that's it. The brain can not purposefully drive its own evolution just yet, and we have collectively deemed it unethical because a crazy dude used it to justify murdering and torturing millions.
If we are being precise, we are driving the evolution of said models based on their usefulness to us, thus their capacity to propagate and metaphorically survive is entirely dependent on how useful they are to their environment.
Your fundamental mistake is thinking that training a model to do xyz is akin to our brains "evolving". The better analogy would be that as a model is training by interactions to its environment, it is changing. Same thing happens to humans, it's just that our update rules are a bit different.
The evolution is across iterations and generations of models, not their parameters.
> should still not be used to justify the diminishment of anyone's humanity.
I am not doing that, on the contrary, I am elevating the models. The fact that you took it as diminishment of the human is not really my fault nor my intention.
The belief that elevating a machine or information to humanity is the reduction of some people's humanity or of humanity as a whole, is entirely your issue.
From my perspective, this only shows the sheer ingenuity of humans, and just how much effort it took for millions of humans to reach something analogous to us, and eventually build a potential successor to humanity.