Metari1:
The reason these observations of survival of the fittest are not a tautology, is that it refers not to a single population from which the weaker individuals have been removed, but to a replicating gene pool with errors. The conclusion is drawn that heritable traits are selected for and against. Heritable traits that confer superior benefits in survivability, will increase in the gene pool, over generations.
"Survival of the Fittest" is a sentence a human being uses to project some sort of intent, it is not some formally defined established theory like newton's theory of gravity or something. The term was coined by Herbert Spencer and adopted by Darwin, where did Spencer have any intent about genes if he didn't know about genes ?
Lets get back the to the Perry Marshall green light example:
"You have a green light."
1) It could mean you are holding a green light bulb.
2) Or you have a green light to drive your car.
3) You can go ahead with the project.
Three completely different meanings based on intent. Intent changed but syntax and semantics, grammar didn't change. What is your intent with "Survival of the Fittest". Do you for example know that Spencer viewed evolution as a progressive upwards process that will eventually lead to an ideal society? That was his intent with SoF, but his intent differs from Robert Sapolsky who views evolution as non-directional.
Evolution, SoF, Selection - these are the semantics. You need in order syntax, grammar, semantics to finally get to the pragmatics or intent as you signal receiver send info to me signal decoder. I am trying to decode your intent and thus I need to ask you a few questions such as where did you get your interpretation that SoF had anything to do with genes.
For this you would need to tell me who said SoF in relation to genes, where did this person derive a theory with genes and the label SoF. SoF is just a label, not some sort of abstract authority or entity in and of itself, the label SoF can only be used to communicate your intent - what is your intent with SoF and where did you derive your intent.
"...Survival of the Fittest ...." Who says so ?
1) Herbert Spencer - what was his intent. Evolution towards our higher destiny which differs from Robert Sapolsky.
2) General with Phd in philosophy saying SoF to bolster the morale of his troops in the heat of battle.
3) John Wilkins - What was his intent ?
4) Mussolini repeating over and over in his speeches SoF
5) Charles Darwin quoting Spencer.
6) Cat walking over somebody's keyboard typing out - SoF and then pressing print and the paper flies out the window. You pick it up tomorrow a single term SoF on a blank piece of paper. You have no idea who wrote it (the cat unintentionally) thus you don't know what was the will,motive,intent or pragmatics behind the words "Survival of the Fittest".
7) Eight year old kid thinking he is a genius by saying that those that survived are the fittest and those that are the fittest survived. Notice that the term ToE , ToNS are used by eight year olds and professors in quantum physics - are they talking about the same thing ? The very fact that little children can talk about the Theory of Natural Selection with a great sense of intellectual achievement - that alone should tell us that we need to look very carefully at what exactly is the Theory of Natural Selection and Evolution. Is there any other theory in physics, math etc. where everybody can all talk together about such a theory, only with the Theory of Natural Selection is everybody from a six year old to a 60 year old physicist under the illusion that they are talking about the same thing. They all use the same label but is their intent the same.