When reading the poetry of Bernstein I found the poem “A Theory’s Evolution” equally funny and cynical. It is basically stating that the idiocy present in the world could not have been produced in a “survival of the fittest” manner or by divine hand. In the first theory the “fittest” would have won; in the second why/how would an almighty being allow such a horrifying reality take place?

The Theory of Flawed Design is not a scientifically proven
Alternative to evolution.

This line sets up the fact that this so called “theory” is not in competition with already accepted scientific theories. This can create a false sense of ease when beginning the poem.

It is based on the everyday life Experience that natural selection could not have produced Such a catastrophic outcome.

And here we go. It started out as something innocent enough but this line plunges that reader into the cynicism of the poem “such a catastrophic outcome” obviously shows that the voice of the poem is put off by the state of “everyday life experience.” This line states taht natural selection, by itself, should have presented a more palatable state of affairs.

Optimists and the religiously Inclined will naturally prefer evolution as an explanation, Since ascribing Design to the state of humanity is almost Unbearable.

This line reminds me of “A Modest Proposal.” The argument of Intelligent Design and Evolution is stil (amazingly) a hot topic in education. To suggest that those who morally opposed Evolution would embrace it when faced with the idea of “Flawed design” comments, once again, on the voice’s dismal view of the state of the world.

For the rest of us, we must continue to insist
That the theory of Flawed Design be taught cheek and jowl,
Neck and neck, mano e mano, with Mr. Darwin’s
Speculations.

In this line I am asserting that the voice present believes very heartily (mano e mano) that children/students deserve to know a “whole truth.” Perhaps the theory of evolution is so difficult for some to grasp because of the state of the world; “how can THAT possibly be the only answer.” Well here is the “missing link.”

The Theory postulates a creator who is Mentally
Impaired, either through some genetic defect or because of
Substance abuse, and is predisposed to behave in a sociopathic Manner;

Here we get the clarification of why the “optimists and the religiously inclined” would prefer evolution rather than accepting such a statement. We also see the voice’s level of detest for the state of things. Words like: mentally impaired, genetic defect, substance abuse, sociopathic have a connotation related to asylums, hospitals, and detention centers. To compare all of society to these things speaks of a serious lack of faith in humanity.

although some Benign Flawed Design theorists, as
They call themselves, posit the radical alternative that the
Creator was distracted or inattentive and the flaws are not the Result of Malevolent Will but incompetence or incapacity.

This last set of lines barely gives an alternative. The only thing worse than a consciously “malevolent” or handicapped deity is one who is too distracted or incompetent to, pardon my French, give a fuck.

Now I don’t know enough about Bernstein or the voice he is portraying to know his actual view on faith, but I don’t know that I would call it strong. I think the overall purpose of the poem is to look at the state of the world (I keep repeating that line) and perhaps get people to stop arguing about silly things and really look at what is going on?