Evolution: Unalienable Rights, trumps, "survival of the fittest"

My opponent has made an interesting argument, but I will refrain from directly rebutting to his arguments in this round until after I have stated my opening case.First of all, I think my opponent has misunderstood his own prompt. Let's take a closer look at it, shall we?"In this debate, Pro claims the Natural Selection Process and evolution, in general, is accurately portrayed by Unalienable Rights of "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness" (Thomas Jefferson), compared to that celebrated phrase "survival of the fittest" (Herbert Spencer)."While I stated that I will refrain from direct rebuttals until the end, I just want to point out that in his argument, my opponent did not fully address the terms "evolution" and "natural selection." Evolution by definition is the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of earth. Natural selection is part of this broader concept of evolution. I will go into greater detail of natural selection later on, but before we proceed any further, let me just clarify that evolution attains to all spectrums of life (whether that be animal, fungus, protist, bacteria, or plant). My opponent's statement that evolution is accurately portrayed by the unalienable rights of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" only applies to human evolution (ignoring the majority of life and organisms). In this debate, I plan to prove how "survival of the fittest" more accurately portrays all of evolution and natural selection.What does "survival of the fittest" mean? This term is used so often that it is misused and misunderstood. Let's put this phrase in context with natural selection. I will use the example given in my second source listed at the bottom. Keep in mind that natural selection is only one component of evolution (others include genetics, migragation, and mutation). The source I listed at the bottom uses beetles for an example. We start off with two different types of beetles, green and brown. Now birds only eat the green beetles meaning that brown beetles are safe to reproduce with all their multitude. Unfortunately for those green beetles, part of their population is being eaten off by birds, so only part of their population has the chance to reproduce. Here's where that factor of genetics plays into evolution. Brown beetles only mate with other brown beetles, and two brown beetles cannot produce a green beetle (and vice versa for the green beetles). Since more brown beetles have survived and are able to reproduce, their population still grows. At the same time, the poor green beetles are being picked off, and their population is shrinking. As a result, the non-eaten are survivng. While both species are doing all they can to reproduce and keep their species alive, only the fittest are surviving. Hence "survival of the fittest."We can also put this phrase in a human context. I will start with a lighter example, such as the NCAA tournament. While this example does not exactly pertain to evolution itself, it will help you understand something before I proceed to put it in human evolutionary terms. There are sixty-eight teams going into the tournament. They start out in four divisions, and they play other college teams. Each game, the winner plays the winner of another game and each team loses at some point until one is remaining. The best team wins all their games and is the champion of the tournament.Humans are competitve by nature. All animals and organisms are. It is a natural instinct because organisms out in the wild are all competing for food sources. Technically humans compete with other animals as well for food sources. We just happen to be lucky that we are at the top of the food chain and therefore have an easier time accessing our needs. Other animals have to go out and hunt for their food. If they are not fit for this, they will starve and not be able to survive. Although the phrase "survival of the fittest" may sound rash and overly competitive, remember that it is a key component to species evolution. Survival of the fittest does not have to mean conquest, war, and fighting (as my oppenent said). Survival of the fittest is not our NCAA tournament with the goal of being the champion and the last man standing. Survival of the fittest is the natural occurence of which natural selection, genetics, mutation, migration, and competitiveness all factor in to help a species either thrive or die.Now that I have made my opening case, I will directly rebut to my oponent. "Imagine, what the world would be like today, if that popular political fad of Social Darwinism during the turn of last century, was based on the phrase "survival of the happiest" instead of "survival of the fittest." Perhaps, the world today may be a happier place."While it would be nice if our world worked towards being the happiest, this would hurt the human race in more ways than you might think. As I previoulsy stated, survival of the fittest does not just mean the strongest, but it means the most hard working, the one with nature on its side. I agree that humans need to step back and enjoy the pleasures of life more, but we cannot turn away completely. What would happen if every human on this planet all of a sudden stopped working and decided to instead sit on their couch and watch TV all day every day? Economies would plunder. Sources of food would be cut off. Basics needs for survival would become almost nonexistent. Sure, you may enjoy the relaxation for a day or so. What happens though when none of your favorite TV shows come on because no one is there to record them? What happens when it's time for dinner and you run out of food because no one is there provide you with any in the store? What happens when you need a drink of water but become ill because no one is working in factories to purify that water? It is all a chain of events that would eventually lead to gradual exstinction (over a very long period of time). While this example is extreme, it is only to make you see my point. We could have elements of this on a more minor level if people take the idea of "survival of the happiest" too far. A competitve spirit and hard workingness are necessary traits in any organism for survival. "We may generalize Thomas Jefferson's claim to all life, once alive, "Life" must have the freedom ("Liberty") "in the pursuit of" survival; otherwise, there is no life. Survival is a natural drive for all life, and the prerequisite for human "Happiness." You're right, survival is a natural drive for all life. But we need a competitive drive to keep up alive, so our species wil survive."Survival of the fittest" has been misunderstood. I reinstate, it is not an excuse for wars and fighting, but it is the natural competive drive that keeps us going. "Survival of the fittest," as Herbert Spencer put it, is key to any organisms evolution and survival. Thank you.Sources: https://www.khanacademy.org...http://evolution.berkeley.edu...http://www.metmuseum.org...;