I'd include that kind of observation in philosophical naturalism, which I see as consistent with existentialism. But if you're talking about a teleological take on cognitive science or epistemology, such as Ruth Millikan's, I'd say it would fall short of the existential confrontation. Evolution shapes our mentality so we can survive, not necessarily so we can discover the ultimate truth. For the latter we need science, philosophy, and art (culture), not just adapted algorithms and heuristics since it's possible we survive based on pleasant fictions and self-serving simplifications.

But sure, evolution helps make the noumena phenomena, enabling us to perceive and conceive of the world in a way we can work with. It's just that culture goes beyond that basic pragmatism. Animals are pragmatic in that sense, too, but as persons we're more anomalous and thus not just Darwinian.