Breaking his argument down line by line.
-
the OP writes:
It seems to me that the very absoluteness of the theory's conclusions tends to compromise its "objective" character.
Let us see if this is the case ...
-
It is all very well to speak of the "evidence of evolution," but if the theory is thorough- going, then human consciousness itself is also governed by evolution.
The theory does indeed say this. True.
-
This means that the categories that allow observation statements to arise as "facts", categories such as number, space, time, event, measurement, logic, causality, and so forth are mere physiological accidents of random mutation and natural selection in a particular species, Homo sapiens.
All things arise from Evolution, thus this. Any correspondence between what Evolution produced and the actual reality is a completely separate issue.
Evolution says precisely as you argue. True.
-
They have not come from any scientific considerations, but rather have arbitrarily arisen in man by blind and fortuitous evolution for the purpose of preserving the species.
Apart from "purpose" (for Evolution has no purpose, says Evolution) you are repeating the above point. True
-
They need not reflect external reality, "the way nature is", objectively, but only to the degree useful in preserving the species.
As mentioned. True.
-
That is, nothing guarantees the primacy, the objectivity, of these categories over others that would have presumably have arisen had our consciousness evolved along different lines, such as those of more distant, say, aquatic or subterranean species.
True.
-
The cognitive basis of every statement within the theory thus proceeds from the unreflective, unexamined historical forces that produced "consciousness" in one species, a cognitive basis that the theory nevertheless generalizes to the whole universe of theory statements (the explanation of the origin of species) without explaining what permits this generalization.
True. I'd add that the only basis for making this statement (in absolute terms) is if you
don't hold to the theory
-
The pretences of the theory to correspond to an objective order of reality, applicable in an absolute sense to all species, are simply not compatible with the consequences of a thoroughly evolutionary viewpoint, which entails that the human cognitive categories that underpin the theory are purely relative and species-specific.
True.
-
The absolutism of random mutation and natural selection as explanative principles ends in eating the theory.
True.
-
Q.E.D.
Well done that man (in my view).
Edited by iano, : No reason given.
™ Version 4.2