Naturalism is Self-Defeating PT 2

This will simplify my argument a bit, and may be helpful. The substantive argument, however, is the first post.

Consider a ancient tribe of people that lived near a lake that was infested with bacteria that in effect killed everyone who came near the lake or entered it. Envision the people developing all sorts of ideas about what is causing the death of their people. Let us imagine the people coming to believe that the evil god Dagon resides in the lake and unleashes wrath on everyone who enters the lake or even comes near it.

For the civilization that lives near this lake, this belief, though false, will improve survival. In this way, from the perspective of naturalistic evolution, the rational faculties of these ancient people, were functioning the way they were supposed to. Naturalistic evolution is concerned with whether or not beliefs enhance survival; not whether beliefs are consistent with the objective truth in reality.

The rational faculties of human beings then, on the account of Naturalistic evolution, is not disposed (or designed by evolution) to produce true beliefs, only useful beliefs that enhance survival.

If this is true, then, why isn’t the belief in naturalistic evolution itself recognized as virtually the same sort of belief as the belief in the evil god Dagon? The belief in Naturalistic evolution should be thought of, at best, as useful, and able to enhance survival; not as true. (since it is produced by the rational faculty under consideration, which on its own account is not formatted to produce true beliefs).

Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: