From my own perspective, it continues to boggle my mind how illogical the position is that
"The individual is 'nothing' and the species 'everything,' and therefore, Ludwig Büchner concluded, the smallest steps of progress in history or nature are marked 'with innumerable piles of corpses.'"Even Jean Paul Sartre was quick to capitulate that without the existence of God there is no "good," not even a "good of the species." To have a particular thing be good for the species as these people mentioned in the article see it would mean that it is an underlying objective truth that they wish us all to agree upon that the continuance and so called "evolution" of the species is a good thing. An objective truth implies an objective truth upholder (a.k.a. a creator being) which is what they are attempting to deny in the first place. Unless of course they think it is just a subjective truth which they happen to all agree upon. In that instance however their argument loses power in that if it is subjective we can choose to reject their argument in favor of our own. No sense these people.