Darwin and the declaration

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Does the prima facie contradiction between the Declaration of Independence's description of the separate and unique "creation" of human beings and Darwin's evolutionary account indicate a broader contradiction between theories of human rights and Darwinian evolution? While similar troubling questions have been raised and answered in the affirmative since Darwin's time, this article renews, updates and significantly fortifies such answers with original arguments. If a "distilled" formulation of the Declaration's central claims, shorn of complicating entanglements with both theology and comprehensive philosophical doctrines, may still be in contradiction with Darwinian evolutionary theory, this should be cause for substantial concern on the part of all normative political theorists, from Straussians to Rawlsians. Despite the notable recent efforts of a few political theorists, evolutionary ethicists and sociobiologists to establish the compatibility of Darwinian evolutionary theory with moral norms such as the idea of natural or human rights, I argue that significant obstacles remain.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)2-16
Number of pages15
JournalPolitics and the Life Sciences
Volume30
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2011
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

evolutionary theory
human rights
declaration of independence
theology
doctrine
cause
human being
time

Keywords

  • Darwin
  • Declaration of Independence
  • distilled Declaration
  • human rights
  • Larry Arnhart
  • moral sense
  • natural rights
  • Thomas efferson
  • utilitarianism

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Sociology and Political Science
  • Social Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Public Administration

Cite this

Darwin and the declaration. / Seagrave, S. Adam.

In: Politics and the Life Sciences, Vol. 30, No. 1, 03.2011, p. 2-16.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{811b0232bb844e04b3c89d0bd32ce017,
title = "Darwin and the declaration",
abstract = "Does the prima facie contradiction between the Declaration of Independence's description of the separate and unique {"}creation{"} of human beings and Darwin's evolutionary account indicate a broader contradiction between theories of human rights and Darwinian evolution? While similar troubling questions have been raised and answered in the affirmative since Darwin's time, this article renews, updates and significantly fortifies such answers with original arguments. If a {"}distilled{"} formulation of the Declaration's central claims, shorn of complicating entanglements with both theology and comprehensive philosophical doctrines, may still be in contradiction with Darwinian evolutionary theory, this should be cause for substantial concern on the part of all normative political theorists, from Straussians to Rawlsians. Despite the notable recent efforts of a few political theorists, evolutionary ethicists and sociobiologists to establish the compatibility of Darwinian evolutionary theory with moral norms such as the idea of natural or human rights, I argue that significant obstacles remain.",
keywords = "Darwin, Declaration of Independence, distilled Declaration, human rights, Larry Arnhart, moral sense, natural rights, Thomas efferson, utilitarianism",
author = "Seagrave, {S. Adam}",
year = "2011",
month = "3",
doi = "10.2990/30_1_2",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "30",
pages = "2--16",
journal = "Politics and the Life Sciences",
issn = "0730-9384",
publisher = "Association for Politics and the Life Sciences",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Darwin and the declaration

AU - Seagrave, S. Adam

PY - 2011/3

Y1 - 2011/3

N2 - Does the prima facie contradiction between the Declaration of Independence's description of the separate and unique "creation" of human beings and Darwin's evolutionary account indicate a broader contradiction between theories of human rights and Darwinian evolution? While similar troubling questions have been raised and answered in the affirmative since Darwin's time, this article renews, updates and significantly fortifies such answers with original arguments. If a "distilled" formulation of the Declaration's central claims, shorn of complicating entanglements with both theology and comprehensive philosophical doctrines, may still be in contradiction with Darwinian evolutionary theory, this should be cause for substantial concern on the part of all normative political theorists, from Straussians to Rawlsians. Despite the notable recent efforts of a few political theorists, evolutionary ethicists and sociobiologists to establish the compatibility of Darwinian evolutionary theory with moral norms such as the idea of natural or human rights, I argue that significant obstacles remain.

AB - Does the prima facie contradiction between the Declaration of Independence's description of the separate and unique "creation" of human beings and Darwin's evolutionary account indicate a broader contradiction between theories of human rights and Darwinian evolution? While similar troubling questions have been raised and answered in the affirmative since Darwin's time, this article renews, updates and significantly fortifies such answers with original arguments. If a "distilled" formulation of the Declaration's central claims, shorn of complicating entanglements with both theology and comprehensive philosophical doctrines, may still be in contradiction with Darwinian evolutionary theory, this should be cause for substantial concern on the part of all normative political theorists, from Straussians to Rawlsians. Despite the notable recent efforts of a few political theorists, evolutionary ethicists and sociobiologists to establish the compatibility of Darwinian evolutionary theory with moral norms such as the idea of natural or human rights, I argue that significant obstacles remain.

KW - Darwin

KW - Declaration of Independence

KW - distilled Declaration

KW - human rights

KW - Larry Arnhart

KW - moral sense

KW - natural rights

KW - Thomas efferson

KW - utilitarianism

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84855302171&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84855302171&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.2990/30_1_2

DO - 10.2990/30_1_2

M3 - Article

C2 - 22204676

AN - SCOPUS:84855302171

VL - 30

SP - 2

EP - 16

JO - Politics and the Life Sciences

JF - Politics and the Life Sciences

SN - 0730-9384

IS - 1

ER -