Cracks in the edifice here.
Nagel has hit the naturalists where they hurt most: namely, by taking their philosophy with the seriousness it deserves and then forcing upon them an existential decision. Unfortunately the politically correct version of naturalism that currently dominates academic philosophy finesses that decision by hiding behind an idealised vision of Darwin as someone who would have welcomed, say, the molecular revolution in genetics but without ever having licensed the grisly side of eugenics.
In contrast, Nagel sees quite clearly that the trajectory of twentieth century biology radically challenges our conventional self-understanding as human beings. I would say that science is pushing us in two rather opposing directions – either towards being more like the other animals or being more like a deity capable of creating such animals. Although Nagel himself refuses to look over this precipice, he does not share the wishful thinking of his critics who might simply blunder into the abyss.