Ants, bees, other colonial insects.

Imagine the complexity involved for the colonie's development in evolution. The changes had to be based from a single queen. If you think about it, development was nearly entirely instinctual. In other words, the mutations occur mainly in animal instincts. In this manner, the entire colony or hive can be treated as a single entity in studying development. The queen had to have given birth to instinct driven servants, each with their own special uniqueness. The queen that bore ants that somehow knew to become bloated with juices, and hang on the cavern walls was the queen that was more likely to survive. (These ants would eventually die and become food.) Likewise, the queen that gave birth to ants that had the instincts to find leaves and chop them off was the colony that survived. This is truly complexing, and it is an example of how our inside systems (i.e.: immune system) became a unified group.

Diving into mutated instincts is a very very complicating subject.
Is that sorta why we have strange phobias? Common ones being fears of bugs and heights. These were beneficial to humans.

__________________

Recent research proposes this social behavior
has nothing to do with mutation and selection.

http://www.asu.edu/asunews/research/...cts_092603.htm

Social insects point to non-genetic origins of societies
Social structures form through group dynamics, not trait selection

The development of social systems is often assumed to be driven by species modifications arrived at through natural selection. Social characteristics such as caste systems and complex behaviors have been thought to be traits programmed by genes, created through evolutionary processes. Though insect social systems are in many ways as complex as human societies, Fewell contends that the relative simplicity of the insects themselves argues against the systems being created solely by the evolutionary development of biocomplexity in the individual organisms.

Though social networks are commonly thought of as evolutionary adaptations, Fewell turns this idea on its head by proposing that the network forms first, following the logic and pattern of group connections, then adaptation follows to strengthen the pattern. Social organization, seen in this light, is essentially an emergent property that comes from the network's geometry - a natural pattern to which organisms adapt.

I'm not a coward! I'm the pinacle of human evolution! H8 bugs!