Evolution doesn't make mistakes because evolution just is. Like entropy, it’s just a kind of pattern/behavior that can emerge from complex systems.

Sometimes evolution leads animals to have traits that become unfavorable enough to prevent traits from being passed on; thats not a mistake, its literally the driving principle of evolution.

As for self awareness, theres lots of gray area in that term. However, social structures have emerged numerous times across the tree of life. Those structures require at least some self awareness. Very successful animals seem to have more self awareness than others because when you interact with beings like you it’s useful to know they are beings like you.

Point is that if knowing what other members of your species might be doing is useful to you or your species survival—which it typically is for tool weilding species—social awareness and self awareness will eventually be selected.

You aren’t self aware because evolution thought “I should make something self aware.” You’re self aware because thinking meant your ancestors could reproduce more. They invented language because naming things made thinking easier and allowed group thinking which allowed them to reproduce more. And eventually they named something “self awareness.”

We are absolutely a brief incident in the context of the universe, but evolution doesn't make mistakes because evolution doesn't have a goal. Ultimately nothing changes because nothing matters already.

nothing. we make our own meaning that’s all

Did anyone else see the humor in the way the question was asked?

"What would it mean"

Because you know, "meaning" is a concept that exists only within the context of awareness.

So if awareness were to disappear for whatever reason, there would suddenly be absolutely no meaning to anything, definitively.

Also, a side note, one could argue that evolution is entirely mistakes. Mutation and speciation, are a direct result of errors in DNA replication. Evolution can only happen as a result of mistakes.

But that's essentially how things work. A bubble in algea fluked a plant cell inside, attached to a root which could sway under it's own impulses... Enough time and it knew to avoid the summer heat, or pull tight when fish were eating near by.

You'd have the basis for reactionary and instinctive life. At some point the muck of cells accidentally happens chance into new variants until you get us.

We spend most of our time fearfully looking for problems and idealistically planning better ways to the futures we want. We're no different from the original muck avoiding harsh sun and predators.

The sense of our own planning, experience, or internal consciousness was a fluke, an accidental necessity for greater chances of survival, reproduction and furthering our accidental experimentations.

The successful breed more, the failed die off. Random chance determines your outcome. It's not intelligent. It's how it works. It works with chaos and time. We've been here a long time and are only just getting going.

Self awareness is pretty common across multiple domains of life.

It's just pretty useful for organisms that have complex behaviours to be aware of themselves. The mirror test is actually a very high threshold and even that has heaps of species that can pass it.

It'd mean we're all gonna be just dirt in the ground.

Evolution dosen't make "mistakes" though, and there is no "progress" or "development"; those are probably self-deception by some lifeforms that are too self-aware.

Evolution just 'happens', and the resultant mix of lifeforms and traits mutually 'adapt' to the ecosystem and wider environment.

it wouldn't mean anything. we'd go back to living on natural instincts and forget any of this happened.

every step in evolution can be seen as a mistake: a mistake that worked better than the original.

I guess it wouldn't mean shit, right?

It would mean whatever you want it to mean.

Presuming you are self-aware, this means that to at least some extent, you are capable of structuring how you view the external/global world vs your internal/local self.

But self awareness and the ability to interpret and consider things... that alone is not sufficient to inform specifically how you may or likely will construct and assign meaning, to anything.

It only means that you are capable of pondering what it means... specific conclusions can and have varied widely.

... Even my own description of self vs world as external and global vs internal and local... probably some would argue that is too specific a way of defining self-awareness, too limiting, other ways are possible.

What if self-awareness is ubiquitous and humans are the first to have awareness of others?

Nothing, and everything.

meh. its just another layer that adds to the replication signal. where would meaning come into play?

You're just going to ask something like that then not even give any of your own ideas?