A few paragraphs down the article is a list of answers to the question you quote, from the same author. It includes this:
> There is a discrepancy between the standards by which evolution measured the quality of her work, and the standards that we wish to apply. Even if evolution had managed to build the finest reproduction-and-survival machine imaginable, we may still have reason to change it because what we value is not primarily to be maximally effective inclusive-fitness optimizers.
The actual thesis of the article is more interesting than what you seem to have read into it.
> There is a discrepancy between the standards by which evolution measured the quality of her work, and the standards that we wish to apply. Even if evolution had managed to build the finest reproduction-and-survival machine imaginable, we may still have reason to change it because what we value is not primarily to be maximally effective inclusive-fitness optimizers.
The actual thesis of the article is more interesting than what you seem to have read into it.