EVER since Darwin, some people have warned that social ills would soon follow the idea that humans are no more than a particular species of ape. If there鈥檚 nothing special about us, why should we treat people any better than we do other animals? The stock response has been to say such worries are groundless: our sense of morality appears to have been hardwired into us by evolution.
Now, new research suggests that those who have a strictly biological definition of humans are subtly less supportive of human rights, although it doesn鈥檛 claim they are any more likely to treat others badly (see 鈥�Does science undermine human rights?鈥�). But if this preliminary result is upheld by further research, it will come as an unwelcome shock to scientific materialists 鈥� and as ammunition for their opponents.
Nonetheless, the former must hold true to their philosophy, especially when that means accepting unsettling conclusions. To do otherwise would be to stoop to the level of those who accept only facts that fit their beliefs.
Advertisement
Rather, materialists should focus on building a secular view of human dignity. After all, spiritual world views haven鈥檛 prevented outrages. Breaking the link between what we are and how we are treated might help prevent them in future.
This article appeared in print under the headline 鈥淗ow to keep our dignity鈥�
