Unless the person became infertile, why would death by old age not be considered part of natural selection? The people who die of old are are unable to have more children, because they are dead. They are also unable to further contribute to the fitness of their descendants.
A person's reproduction isn't just whether they did or not, but how much they did.
when people use language like "thanks to" when talking about evolution, I think it attaches too much of a value thing, such that people sort of smuggle in the idea that a thing that happens is good, by hiding it in the description saying that it happens.
Natural selection is, in its respectable form, about what is, not about what ought.
That's not to say one can't say related things about what ought, but I think one should be sure to clearly express when one is doing one versus when one is doing the other.
A person's reproduction isn't just whether they did or not, but how much they did.
when people use language like "thanks to" when talking about evolution, I think it attaches too much of a value thing, such that people sort of smuggle in the idea that a thing that happens is good, by hiding it in the description saying that it happens.
Natural selection is, in its respectable form, about what is, not about what ought.
That's not to say one can't say related things about what ought, but I think one should be sure to clearly express when one is doing one versus when one is doing the other.