I see you are debating lisps ergonomics, but that doesn't dismiss the paradigm. Erlang Haskell and Prolog has far better syntax readability, so I don't see this as really relevant in discussing the alternative to Von Neuman.

There are other ergonomics issues beyond syntax that pose issues to adoption (Haskell in production has become something of a running gag). Moving the paradigm into a mixed language alongside procedural code seem to help a lot in seeing its adoption in recent years. (swift, rust, python, c++)

I am responding to the assertion that the reason we don't all use Lisp is because we all have brain damage. My claim is that there are broader ergonomic issues with the language family. You could argue that maybe the system architecture and execution model of the Lisp machines should be debated separately from its syntax, but I am responding to an argument about its syntax.