Brian & Jim have opened an important dialogue, and I hope that others join in.
Here is a good starting point (stolen from Jim):
Humans have foresight, genes don't.
There is A LOT in that statement. A fundamental tenant of evolutionary theory, as least from the genetic level, is that foresight is not involved. Many earlier theories that stressed foresight, direction, and the like have been discounted. There are good reasons for this, at the genetic level of inquiry.
BUT, as Jim reminds us, humans DO have foresight. Ernst Mayer used to struggle with this in his synthetic writings. Biological SYSTEMS have foresight (e.g. feedforward as well as feedback mechanisms), and this is a fact independent of terms such as consciousness, free will, or the like.
Brian is right in stressing that behavior, ALL behavior, is a phenotype that goes beyond the genes. Jim is right that ALL behavior is genetically based. These are not contradictory views, but essential elements in a common view that we can only hope reaches out to "the masses" of humanity, among which we are participants.
Unless we can come to grips with levels of organization in behavior and biology we may well be left with squabbles among warring camps. I, for one, see this issue of finding both commonalities and essential transformations as we cross levels of order as one of THE MOST challenging and important themes in current inquiry. As evolutionary psychology matures as a field (or fields) it will surely both have to deal with these transformations in explicit terms, and then have the opportunity to share the emerging insights with others (e.g. neurobiologists and developmental biologists, who have conceptually similar stumbling blocks).
A+ for both teams (= one team). The game has started Hope others join in.