Utility and Evolutionist Economics

Utilitarianism conflates the criterion of Value--Pleasure--with the preeminent bearer of Value--Usefulness.  Thus, Utility and Pleasure-causing are synonymous in the doctrine, as is evident when Mill struggles to distinguish 'higher' and 'lower' pleasures.  Accordingly, Utilitarianism is merely a variety of Hedonism.  Now, some clothing is, because of the way it feels on the skin, pleasurable.  But otherwise, the Utilitarian concepts of Utility and Usefulness are inapplicable to clothing.  For, the value of clothing usually consists not in its feeling on the skin, but in its effectiveness in facilitating adaptation to an environment--work-boots in mud, a business suit in an office, shorts on a tennis court, a space suit on the Moon, etc.  Thus, traditional Utilitarianism is inadequate to an Evolutionist concept of Economics, which entails an essential relationship between a Producer/Consumer and an Environment.  But that inadequacy does not necessarily apply to the concept of Utility that Utilitarianism distorts--Usefulness, in its ordinary meaning, which can characterize the value of clothing in the promotion of Evolution, e. g. Armstrong's spacesuit that allows him to take a giant leap for the species.