We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected]
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Long-time readers of my work will note a shift in my political orientation in earlier essays in this volume, from libertarian to classical liberal. The differences are not huge, but neither are they trivial, especially when it comes to fiscal issues. As I’ve gown older, and especially since the Great Recession of 2008/2009, it has become abundantly clear to me that human nature is darker than I previously realized. As well, there is the issue of what moral obligation we have to help those who cannot help themselves, most notably as it relates to social spending. I’ve come to realize just how unfortunate life can be for a sufficiently large number of people that I no longer think that private charity alone can do the job of shoring up a social safety net for the unlucky. The deeper I looked into the matter of how lives turn out, the more I realized how much is out of our control. This essay, an expansion of that Scientific American column that was originally published in Quillette January, 2019, is a result of my continued research on the subject of, as the above title notes, how lives turn out.
This article first appeared as a book chapter in the <italic>Handbook of Philosophy and Public Policy</italic>, edited by David Boonin and published by Palgrave in 2018. I was tasked with finding a test case of freedom of speech and inquiry from the sciences, in the larger context of free speech issues as related to public policy and the law. I have already written extensively about evolution and creationism, most notably in my 1997 book <italic>Why People Believe Weird Things</italic> and my 2006 book <italic>Why Darwin Matters</italic>, so here I engage the creationist movement as a free speech issue inasmuch as its proponents hold a minority viewpoint as far as the scientific community is concerned. Nevertheless, I contend that they should be free to believe, teach (and preach) whatever they like about the origins and diversity of life, and that, in the well-trodden principle, sunlight is the best disinfectant (to which Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis added “electric light the most efficient policeman”).
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.