OK, so Jacques Dubochet, the author of the essay, is linking Darwinism to a worldview based on reality and most of the general public, even those that are educated, have worldviews based on mysticism and dogma. At least this tells us where he's coming from. But Dubochet's reality is not self-evident. Indeed, many aspects of it are "shocking" because this reality conflicts with any worldviews that find a place for purpose and meaning transcending the individual level. As an example, Dubochet says that "the idea that our legs are not made for walking or our eyes for seeing is difficult to grasp". He recognises that most educated people do think our legs are made for walking and that our eyes are made for seeing - but considers these views to be delusional. These people need to be informed by Darwinism which shows us that "life evolves without a goal".

"The confrontation between intuitive understanding and reality is nothing new. The Copernican idea that the Earth revolves, not the Sun, also caused serious trouble in the past but nowadays everybody accepts it as obvious. Will this be the case with the theory of evolution? I have my doubts."

...

J: How can we know there is no goal involved in descent with modification if we believe we, as humans, are goal-directed? Not remotely possible. It's just a metaphysical preference, pure and simple. Because the existence of one or more single-celled creatures in the Precambrian doesn't explain anything logically or even analogically with respect to subsequent classes of critters. Darwinian evolution = metaphysical preference + inability to disprove it. Sounds kinda like what most people object to about dogma.