I believe we are part of an evolutionary process that did not have us ‘‘in mind’’.
That in no way diminishes our value or sense of self worth. To do so, would be to fly in the face of evolution!
Sarah, how can you know that we have a value or a sense of self worth?
If you embrace Darwinism to explain the nature of living organisms, including their sense of personal value or sense of self worth, I would presume you choose to do so without having recourse to a supernatural explanation. If Darwinism is true, natural selection formed the traits of all living creatures – as in this view, characteristics are preserved if they provide a competitive advantage in surviving to reach reproductive maturity, and in having access to mates for reproduction.
Even if genetic mutations provide new and novel traits (without killing the mutant as a birth defect), fitness will be the sole determinant if those new traits are perpetuated within the gene pool.
Cognitive faculties, thus, are also the result of natural selection, including our neurophysiology and brain chemistry. Fitness was the sole determinant of the viability of those faculties, so the ability to recognize the objective truth (if such a value judgement can be said to exist in such a formulation) was not necessary. If the brain and “consciousness” / cognitive apparatus enables the organism to stay alive, the beliefs need not be true or even
reasonable. Thus, there is no necessary connection between the cognitive system’s ability to improve survival, and the truth of the beliefs it produces. (A variation of this argument is often used by atheists to argue that religion is commonplace in humans because it provides – or, they say, once provided – an evolutionary advantage, despite the supposed falsity of religious belief.)
So, is the truthfulness of a proposition connected to its improvement in our evolutionary fitness? Clearly, no. Geocentrism is false but provided great practicality to sailors, farmers, etc., as it made it easier to predict sunrise, sunset, the change of the seasons, etc.
If I have the mistaken belief that the federal government will arrest everyone who has credit card debt, I cut up all my credit cards, pay off all my debt, and live with cash. I now have the peace of mind of not having to worry about being arrested, and I am able to accelerate my mortgage payments. My false belief thus improves my life.
Or perhaps I hold the wholly unfounded belief that my devastating good looks make me irresistible to women, and that encourages me to approach more women, thus increasing my evolutionary fitness and chances of reproduction. A false belief (trust me) but one which can improve my evolutionary fitness.
So, the practicality of a belief does not imply its truth. The practicality of an entire cognitive system does not guarantee that it is aimed at forming true beliefs.
So based on this argument (originally formulated by the philosopher Alvin Plantinga, who explored it at some length) if Naturalism is true, then we have no reason to be confident that
any of our beliefs are actually true – including our belief in the truth of naturalism. If naturalism is true, we have no
reason to believe it is true. It is, at best, a mere opinion.
Plantinga contrasts this with Theism, which offers assurance that there is an objective Truth, and that God created and ordered our minds to form true beliefs. This provides adequate grounds for believing that thought reflects reality.
To call a cognitive system “reliable” presupposes that there is a purpose or goal at which our rational faculties aim, namely, the acquisition of truth. We consider our cognitive systems as reliable if they produce a preponderance of true beliefs. By saying this, we recognize that our cognitive systems have a function, namely the production of true beliefs.
If we say the cognitive system has a function, that suggests it was designed. Plantinga: “Human beings and their organs are so constructed that there is a way they should work, a way they are supposed to work, a way they work when they work right,” in other words, a design plan.
I’m just sayin’.
