XPost: alt.books.cs-lewis, rec.arts.books   
   From: fwbrown@bellsouth.net   
      
   In alt.books.cs-lewis Jerry Friedman  wrote:   
   >   
   > One was that he said that if our reasoning ability came about from   
   > natural processes such as evolution, rather than as a gift from God, we   
   > had no reason to trust it.   
   >   
   > But we'd expect reasoning ability that evolved to be reliable enough to   
   > be useful for survival. Also, God might not have given us reliable   
   > reasoning ability either.  In fact, we know our intelligence isn't   
   > perfect, and most Christians say there are things in Christianity that   
   > we're incapable of understanding.  So the argument is pointless; both   
   > evolution and creation can explain why our reasoning ability is the way   
   > it is, with evolution being the one that can give a better explanation   
   > than "Because God happened to want it that way."   
   >   
   > (I hope I'm stating his argument correctly.  I can't find it in /Mere   
   > Christianity/ at Google Books.)   
      
   One part you didn't mention was his objection that using a logical   
   argument about evolution (or anything else) to prove that human reason   
   gives genuine insights into reality is not valid; he compares it to a   
   defendant testifying on his own behalf.  For instance, consider this   
   argument:   
      
      Evolution favors traits which give a survival advantage.   
      The ability to reason accurately would give a survival advantage.   
      Therefore, evolution favors the ability to reason accurately.   
      
   But Lewis points out that to accept such an argument, you have to already   
   believe that logical arguments can establish truth, which is exactly   
   what you're trying to prove.   
      
   Essentially, Lewis is saying that reason cannot prove the truth of   
   anything, including its own existence, if it is not assumed from the   
   outset to be capable of providing a valid method of finding truth.   
   Theists believe reason is valid because it comes from the mind of God;   
   admittedly that's an assumption.  Atheists believe reason is valid   
   because it is useful, but that itself is an argument using reason and so,   
   whether they recognize it or not, they also are making an assumption.   
      
   I'll have to check my copes of Lewis's books when I get home, but I   
   believe this particular argument may have come from "The Abolition of Man"   
   rather than from "Mere Christianity."   
      
   --   
   F. Wayne Brown    
      
         ur sag9-ga ur-tur-še3 ba-an-kur9   
   "A dog that is played with turns into a puppy." (Sumerian proverb)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)