Could you explain how the story relies on such a distorted view (not saying you're wrong, it's just that I'm a history student, so science isn't my strong point)
I'm willing to say he is wrong actually.
Also, humans don't need to be eaten, such a parasite could evolve out of a need for humans to poop further away from home, for example.
Kanasta has the proper view of evolution, and I likewise am frequently annoyed by people assuming there is an end goal or plan beyond have-more-sex and make-sure-your-babies-survive-to-have-more-sex.
But the story, and the concept of this hypothetical parasite are compatible with this correct view of evolution. As I tried to point out above, the parasite doesn't have to actually be driving us into space. An efficient parasite doesn't kill the host, but keeps it alive long enough to spread. Too many parasites in one host are more likely to cause illness (they compete for resources within the body), so a parasite that is the first of it's kind inside a give host individual has an advantage over a parasite inside a host with others of its kind, as that animal will be able to carry more of that parasite, drop more eggs that match its exact genetics, while not being much more likely to die.
So it is to the benefit of parasites to spread into as many new individuals as possible. Which is why most tend to get pooped out as larva, rather than living fat and happy in one animal for all time. Lots of hosts is a good plan.
We know that several parasites are able to influence motivations and tendencies and various mental functions of their hosts. An advantageous (for the parasite) change to host behavior is just as selected for as anything else. So if exploration could be advantageous as I pointed out earlier, then it could very well be selected for.
I don't recall the story informing us that the parasites were extraterrestrial, just that the drunken parasitologist thought their purpose was for us to end up in alien stomachs. But that doesn't need to imply design. I've heard plenty scientists anthropomorphize the shit out of things they know aren't sentient. Up to and including the desires of electrons. I took it as just a thing he said. The parasites don't need to have planned for this, that is just the desire they ended up looking like they caused.
Weird reasoning I guess, but it really didn't strike me as preplanned.
Oh, and any parasite with enough distribution through our population to effect the growth of civilization wouldn't cause deaths or extremes of behavior or whatever as Scattercat suggested is silly. If we are that highly infected, how would we see it as extreme. It would just be that normal was much less adventurous than the human average appears to be. Maybe extremes would have cropped up in Mesopotamia or a cave somewhere, but certainly not noticeable today. And likely such a drive would have been helpful to humans too (societally if not geneticall), right up to the point where we got eaten by aliens.
Sure, it is a simpler to assume humans evolved that drive on our own. But maybe parasites made it stronger. Or maybe this makes a better story. I don't know that I'd have given this guy funding if I were on the NSF board, but I don't have the problems with the story a lot of you guys seem to.