Peter Singer Quotes

The rules of morality are not the conclusion of our reason.

An act has no ethical quality whatever unless it be chosen out of several all equally possible.

It may not have the virtuous ring of the golden rule, but the maxim 'never say never' is one of the most important in ethics.

Convinced as I am and as I am from my government that the world needs a new moral architecture over all I believe that this should be the first topic to debate in our world of today, ethics, moral.

It's easy to get into the grey zone [of ethics].

I have learned that a clear conscience, or a legal opinion, does not make you ethically bullet proof.

One's concern with the ethics of means and ends varies inversely with one's personal interest in the issue ... Any effective means is automatically judged by the opposition as being unethical.

Science, by itself cannot, supply us with an ethic.

The act of willing this or that, of choosing among various courses of conduct, is central in the realm of ethics.

The point never to lose sight of is to be guided by the correct thing, as you see it. It's the only way to approach such profound matters and retain your integrity.

There's a great deal of difference between thinking reflectively about moral issues and achieving higher standards of ethical behavior.

Ethics are not necessarily to do with being law-abiding. I am very interested in the moral path, doing the right thing.

Action indeed is the sole medium of expression for ethics.

Younger scientists are extremely sensitive to the moral implications of all they do.

It's because I work in ethics, and, more specifically, applied ethics, that I think it's important that if you have things to say that you think are right and you think could make the world a better place, it's important that many people read about them.

The ethic of conviction and the ethic of responsibility are not opposites. They are complementary to one another.

The fundamental basis of ethics must be chosen in some non-scientific way.

One cannot but regret the deliberate absence of every transcendental moral reference in governing the so-called developed society.

The death of dogma is the birth of morality.

Ethical issues are not always obvious and they never go away.

The ends do not justify the means. The means are the ends.

Opinions upon moral questions are more often the expression of strongly felt expediency than of careful ethical reasoning

Science is a magnificent force, but it is not a teacher of morals. It can perfect machinery, but it adds no moral restraints to protect society from the misuse of the machine. It can also build gigantic intellectual ships, but it constructs no moral rudders for the control of storm tossed human vessel. It not only fails to supply the spiritual element needed but some of its unproven hypotheses rob the ship of its compass and thus endangers its cargo.

I feel like I've always approached criticism with a degree of morality, right? Like, not as a moralizer, but just as somebody who wants to make sure that the culture we're getting is at least morally aware of how it's functioning.

One needs to know what is right and what is wrong.