Chesterton Daily

I am a great fan of G.K. Chesterton and was delighted when my brother sent me this link: http://maritain.nd.edu/jmc/etext/gkcday10.htm.
Here you can recieve a daily dose of Chesterton's witty observations.

Here is a recent example:

IN these days we are accused of attacking science because we want it to be scientific. Surely there is not any undue disrespect to our doctor in saying that he is our doctor, not our priest or our wife or ourself. It is not the business of the doctor to say that we must go to a watering-place; it is his affair to say that certain results of health will follow if we do go to a watering-place. After that, obviously, it is for us to judge. Physical science is like simple addition; it is either infallible or it is false. To mix science up with philosophy is only to produce a philosophy that has lost all its ideal value and a science that has lost all its practical value. I want my private physician to tell me whether this or that food will kill me. It is for my private philosopher to tell me whether I ought to be killed.

I have to wonder, in light of this statement, how Chesterton would have begun to sort through the numerous entanglements of religion/ideology and science/empiricism suggested by this extremely fascinating and (I suspect) important collision between empiricism, Darwinism, and our popular assumptions about human equality that actually have no empirical basis at all, but are derived from Christian and Enlightenment philosophical commitments. It is important because it has the potential to make us ask the question about worldview or ideology - what are we basing our values on in society? Is there, can there be, agreement on that?