Richard Dawkins has been putting on his Youtube channel interviews with different intellectuals about the importance/implications of Darwin.
I am currently listening to the interview with Peter Singer.
The video is about 45 minutes but very fascinating.
Singer is highly controversial and speaks with Dawkins about how generally we feel that humans deserve special consideration solely because they are genetically human, and that Darwin's demonstration of how evolution is a continuum merits that we re-think this idea of the sanctity of human life.
Another philosopher whom I admit I have not read but have learned about has also written about Darwinism and it's implications for the concept of "human dignity"
Should a being merit special consideration *regardless of what other traits it may have* solely on account of being genetically human? Why or why not? Does a human embryo or a person with no recoverable
brain function deserve more moral consideration than a chimpanzee? What about a cat or a dog?