Steven Pinker has a really interesting essay in the New York Times on morality. He discusses the role of evolution in forming what he calls a moral sense. His main thesis is that understanding of science and human nature do not undermine the importance of moral reasoning, but provide it with a more thorough ground and provides humans with a better understanding of who we are so that we can reason better.
I do not agree with a lot of what Pinker says in the essay--or at least his accounting of different features of morality--but the article is a good and worthwhile read. And I do think the general thesis is correct. Unfortunately, I do not have time to detail where I think Pinker goes wrong. I'll give that to you has homework.
(Hat tip: A&L Daily)