If somebody used my views to justify a completely self - centred lifestyle, which involved trampling all over other people in any way they chose, roughly what I suppose, at a sociological level social Darwinists did - I think I would be fairly hard put to argue against it on purely intellectual grounds. I think it would be more: “This is not a society in which I wish to live. Without having a rational reason for it necessarily, I'm going to do whatever I can to stop you doing this.”
I couldn't, ultimately, argue intellectually against somebody who did something I found obnoxious. I think I could finally only say, “Well, in this society you can't get away with it’ and call the police.”
I realise this is very weak, and I've said I don't feel equipped to produce moral arguments in the way I feel equipped to produce arguments of a cosmological and biological kind.
Nick Pollard talks to Dr. Richard Dawkins