Well, I think the main flaw is that reasonable people could think that survival fitness and perception reflecting reality and very closely related. The argument

Well, I think the main flaw is that reasonable people could think that survival fitness and perception reflecting reality and very closely related. The argument that there could be a better survivability fitness than reflecting reality is overblown by Professor Hoffman. It's not like we don't already know that our perceptions can be misguided, optical illusion thrives on it. It's also extremely hard to believe we could come up with such a successful device as science if our perception of the universe was so off. If there is a divergence, it's in fringe effects (like optical illusions) and low percent or sub-percent, not a major shift and distorsion. It's a fun idea to entertain, but I'm worried that someone with a PhD could hold that our perceptions are so far off.