The case of Huxley is of interest because, beyond the important details, the mere title of his Evolution and Ethics hints at what is clearer now: the darwinian theory can’t resolve ‘ethical questions’, with respect to evolution and/or ethical reason.
This passage from WHEE shows the way that reductionist theories, by partitioning facts and values, unwitting reduce theory to something that no longer fits the facts. This is obvious from history, but is it true of earlier evolution? Surely it must be. Darwinians mechanize altruism in a theory of natural selection, using mathematical trick plays too complicated for the general public to understand, but these arguments are unconvincing. Altruism has to be a conscious experience with a wide spectrum of related states of consciousness, and this could never really fit the models shown. The whole field of group and/or kin selection is a field of sophistries, missing the point.