Lizards: Windows to the Evolution of Diversity Book

Well, here is one man who understands the implications of Darwinism, without fear. (So also Peter Singer) Rachels rightly understands that Darwinism leads to the rejection of theism as a basis for moral values. In the same way, it leads to a rejection of human dignity and a "rights" basis for morality.

So, now that we have dispensed with God, we definitely suffer a de-valuing of human significance. Since Darwin, we now see that man is just a more sophisticated development of the animal kingdom, albeit different by degree, not by kind. So, animal rights are elevated, humans somewhat - uh, not so much.

Rachels advocates a new moral basis he called "moral individualism" whereby moral choices are based on the situation of the individual being in question (be it human or non-human).

Although I do not agree with his conclusions, I commend him for not being afraid to state the obvious implications for Darwinism - as others have been afraid to do. I fear, however, that this thinking will find currency in elite academic circles and will make its way into public policy. We will all stand to lose if this comes true.