“Survival of the fittest.” That single, short phrase has probably done much to impede the spread of secular perspective and foster a suspicion of science in general. When you ask the “person-on-the-street” what evolution is all about, that’s how they are likely to respond: “Survival of the fittest.” A lot of people think Darwin himself coined the phrase to describe natural selection. But he didn’t. English philosopher Herbert Spencer came up with it. I think Darwin originally described it as “descent with variation,” which isn’t nearly as catchy and memorable as “survival of the fittest.”

The phrase suggests that life is essentially a brutal, heartless struggle for survival. It evokes images of “Nature, red in tooth and claw’ (Tennyson) and bloody Nat Geo wildlife documentaries. It also brings to mind the way natural selection was twisted by Social Darwinists, proponents of eugenics, Nazis, and others who mistakenly saw natural selection as a blueprint for ordering human societies. No wonder so many dislike the notion of evolution!

Furthermore, “survival of the fittest”—at least in our contemporary understanding of the word “fit”—doesn’t accurately describe natural selection at all. I’m not particularly “fit,” and neither are most Americans. If life is all about survival of the fittest, a lot of us aren’t going to make the final cut. The phrase just sounds intimidating and ominous.

And we now know that the evolution of humans is not simply a matter of vicious struggle. Humanity evolved through both competition and cooperation. Archaeologist have excavated Neanderthal skeletons dating back to some 60,000 years ago in a cave in Iraqi Kurdistan. One of those skeletons belonged to a man estimated to have been around 50 years old at the time of his death—the equivalent of an 80-year old person today. This particular skeleton was missing a right hand, had a damaged skull, and a right arm that had been broken a couple times. He also had a bad limp. Scientists tell us he probably could not have taken care of himself. Members of his tribe kept him alive for a long time after he was injured.

I’ve read similar accounts from other excavations around the world, and apparently these instances have become so common that there is a new sub-specialty of paleo-anthropology emerging that focuses on how early humans helped each other.

So it’s not survival of the fittest after all. Human evolution has also been about the survival of those who care for each other best. Yes, life can be brutal, hard, and competitive. But if you have a few friends who will fix your broken bones, bring you some food, and carry you along, the journey becomes bearable—even joyful.

To replace “survival of the fittest” I wonder if we could come up with a pithy, memorable description of natural selection that doesn’t scare people but intrigues and inspires them. Maybe there’s something out there already and I’m not aware of it. But if you have any ideas, I’d love to hear them.