Talk:Reverence for Life

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Ethics

I will add the references for this article in the next day or two. Do let me know how I could improve the article. --MJBT talk • mjbt contribs 12:18, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have started adding references and this weekend I will try and start rewriting this with an appropriate style. Any help much appreciated. --MJBT talk • mjbt contribs 21:52, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have updated some of the references, deleted some quotes and including a list of further reading. Any help with rewritting in correct style much appreciated. If you don't have time to make changes but have suggestions just write them here. --MJBT 11:18, 8 November 2008 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mjbt (talk • contribs)

Philanthropy[edit]

The article states that "Reverence for Life can also be seen in the explosion of ethical, charitable organizations of all kinds in many parts of the world."

It's not obvious that Reverence for Life caused an increase in philanthropy. Affluence is perhaps a more likely factor. Reverence for Life might be said to explain philanthropy in general--although this is perhaps speculative. Also, "explosion" in this context seems odd, as though something has been destroyed. Urgos (talk) 20:07, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed Merger[edit]

Oppose: It would be a step backward if this article were merged into "Sanctity of life". Reverence for Life is a moral concept, as the article explains. It is both more inclusive and fundamental. By comparison, "Sanctity of life" is a weak standard. As we know, "sanctity" is violated with impunity. Fconaway (talk) 20:19, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]