“One absolutely central inconsistency ruins [the naturalistic worldview]… The whole picture professes to depend on inferences from observed facts. Unless inference is valid, the whole picture disappears… nless Reason is an absolute–all is in ruins. Yet those who ask me to believe this world picture also ask me to believe that Reason is simply the unforeseen and unintended by-product of mindless matter at one stage of its endless and aimless becoming. Here is flat contradiction. They ask me at the same moment to accept a conclusion and to discredit the only testimony on which that conclusion can be based.”
—C. S. Lewis, “Is Theology Poetry?”, The Weight of Glory and Other Addresses
So, basically put, reason cannot exist if created by something random and without reason.
But genetic mutations happen in millions of different forms: the surviving mutations in our genes are the ones (unsuprisingly) that survive. So genes that are good at surviving: live…genes that are bad (or even apathetic)= zap.
This would explain why a creature, on a larger scale, has reliable logic…because, if it’s data about the world or how to survive within it wasn’t proficiant, the creature would perish: end of that line. The creature with good logic not only gets to live but has a better chance of creating offspring.
Now, I’m not saying Lewis (and other defenders of the argument) was wrong…but I don’t quite see yet how he was right, if seen in terms of evolutionary theory?
For, if seen via genetic mutation, at first glance it looks very much as though logic is eventually inevitable for a species who’s primary tool for survival is planning and thinking ahead, rather than fast legs or strength.