“The ethic of Reverence for Life is the ethic of Love widened into universality.”

— Albert Schweitzer

Epilogue, p. 235 http://books.google.com/books?id=jHuYuLugqBAC&q=%22The+ethic+of+Reverence+for+Life+is+the+ethic+of+Love+widened+into+universality%22&pg=PA235#v=onepage
Out of My Life and Thought : An Autobiography (1933)

Adopted from Wikiquote. Last update Sept. 28, 2023. History

Help us to complete the source, original and additional information

Do you have more details about the quote "The ethic of Reverence for Life is the ethic of Love widened into universality." by Albert Schweitzer?

Albert Schweitzer 126

French-German physician, theologian, musician and philosoph… 1875–1965

Related quotes

“Let me give you a definition of ethics: It is good to maintain and further life — it is bad to damage and destroy life. And this ethic, profound and universal, has the significance of a religion. It is religion.”

Albert Schweitzer (1875–1965) French-German physician, theologian, musician and philosopher

As quoted in Albert Schweitzer : The Man and His Mind (1947) by George Seaver, p. 366

“The World and Life are one. Physiological life is of course not "Life". And neither is psychological life. Life is the world.
Ethics does not treat of the world. Ethics must be a condition of the world, like logic.
Ethics and Aesthetics are one.”

Ludwig Wittgenstein (1889–1951) Austrian-British philosopher

Journal entry (24 July 1916), p. 77e
1910s, Notebooks 1914-1916

“Ethics, too, are nothing but reverence for life. That is what gives me the fundamental principle of morality, namely, that good consists in maintaining, promoting, and enhancing life, and that destroying, injuring, and limiting life are evil.”

Albert Schweitzer (1875–1965) French-German physician, theologian, musician and philosopher

Kulturphilosophie (1923), Vol. 2 : Civilization and Ethics

“The real task is not to rid life of ethics but to rid ethics of its ideological content.”

John Carroll (1944) Australian professor and author

Source: Break-Out from the Crystal Palace (1974), p. 38

“The defect in this argument is that it assumes that the basis of ethics is life, whereas ethics is concerned, not with life, but with consciousness. The question ever asked by ethics is not, Does the thing live? but. Does it feel? It is impossible to do right and wrong to that which is incapable of sentient experience. Ethics arises with consciousness and is coextensive with it.”

J. Howard Moore (1862–1916)

We have no ethical relation to the clod, the molecule, or the scale sloughed off from our skin on the back of our hand, because the clod, the molecule, and the scale have no feeling, no soul, no anything rendering them capable of being affected by us [...] The fact that a thing is an organism, that it has organisation, has in itself no more ethical significance than the fact that it has symmetry, or redness, or weight.
Source: The New Ethics (1907), The Survival of the Strenuous, p. 169