Just act as if they would, because while you’re probably right, you don’t know, and it would be a poor reason not to do the right thing.
I think the golden rule is about as perfect a rule as exists, and I really think I can bootstrap an entirely humanist set of morals from it.
Even its Christian variant, love your neighbor as yourself, does the job very well without actually needing the attendant theology. You can make a very worthy entire life’s project out of progressively expanding your definition of who your neighbor is.
I think the golden rule is about as perfect a rule as exists
I’ve heard a variant dubbed the ‘platinum’ rule as a slight improvement. Instead of “treat others as you would have them treat you”, it’s just “treat others as they would like to be treated”. It’s especially valuable as a cross-cultural check where like you might want others to maintain eye contact with you so you know you’ve got their full attention; while someone else might take that kind of maintained eye contact as a sign of aggression.
…or like that creepy mofo at seemingly every work space who just butts into peoples’ personal space because “well I’m a hugger” like, god damnit Dave, we know your a hugger, but you just pressed yourself up against Cathy’s tits without her consent. Again. And now she’s going to HR. And Dave will get a stern email and still somehow keep his job.
I think the nuance of the golden rule is that “treat others the way you want to be treated.” Implies that the way I want to be treated is that I want someone to consider that I might be different to them. If someone was unsure of how I want to be treated, I would want to be asked, or have them be considerate enough to avoid treatment they’re unsure about, therefore, I do the same. It doesn’t mean “punch someone because you want to be punched.” (To exaggerate).
The golden rule is perfect if you use that bit of nuance and we don’t have to make up a new rule.
There is a reason the platinum rule exists. The first time I heard it when I was younger, it blew my mind to consider that my preferences wouldn’t be the same as others’, and to pay special attention to how other people want to be treated.
Don’t poopoo it if it is obvious to you, that is not the same for others. Also someone made up the golden rule, so what is wrong with making up one better?
The platinum rule is fine insofar as it’s true and not a bad thing to consider it just doesn’t make sense to me to chalk it up to another rule.
I don’t really think it is a better rule. For one thing, it’s encapsulated in the golden rule as I explained. For another thing the golden rule is phrased the way it is because it’s meant as an introspective idea. It’s meant as a heuristic when you can’t know how someone else might want to be treated, or when you are making a decision that might affect other people without full information of who they are or what they want.
Part of the reason we teach it to kids so that they can have an understanding that their actions affect other people to the same extent that other people affect them.
I disagree that it is encapsulated into the golden rule for everyone’s understanding of the golden rule.
The golden rule is fine for kids that are too young to think more abstractly than “how would I feel if…”, but at some point you have to learn that how other people might want to be treated is different from how you want to be treated.
Just act as if they would, because while you’re probably right, you don’t know, and it would be a poor reason not to do the right thing.
I think the golden rule is about as perfect a rule as exists, and I really think I can bootstrap an entirely humanist set of morals from it.
Even its Christian variant, love your neighbor as yourself, does the job very well without actually needing the attendant theology. You can make a very worthy entire life’s project out of progressively expanding your definition of who your neighbor is.
I’ve heard a variant dubbed the ‘platinum’ rule as a slight improvement. Instead of “treat others as you would have them treat you”, it’s just “treat others as they would like to be treated”. It’s especially valuable as a cross-cultural check where like you might want others to maintain eye contact with you so you know you’ve got their full attention; while someone else might take that kind of maintained eye contact as a sign of aggression.
…or like that creepy mofo at seemingly every work space who just butts into peoples’ personal space because “well I’m a hugger” like, god damnit Dave, we know your a hugger, but you just pressed yourself up against Cathy’s tits without her consent. Again. And now she’s going to HR. And Dave will get a stern email and still somehow keep his job.
But yeah, platinum rule!
I think the nuance of the golden rule is that “treat others the way you want to be treated.” Implies that the way I want to be treated is that I want someone to consider that I might be different to them. If someone was unsure of how I want to be treated, I would want to be asked, or have them be considerate enough to avoid treatment they’re unsure about, therefore, I do the same. It doesn’t mean “punch someone because you want to be punched.” (To exaggerate).
The golden rule is perfect if you use that bit of nuance and we don’t have to make up a new rule.
There is a reason the platinum rule exists. The first time I heard it when I was younger, it blew my mind to consider that my preferences wouldn’t be the same as others’, and to pay special attention to how other people want to be treated.
Don’t poopoo it if it is obvious to you, that is not the same for others. Also someone made up the golden rule, so what is wrong with making up one better?
The platinum rule is fine insofar as it’s true and not a bad thing to consider it just doesn’t make sense to me to chalk it up to another rule.
I don’t really think it is a better rule. For one thing, it’s encapsulated in the golden rule as I explained. For another thing the golden rule is phrased the way it is because it’s meant as an introspective idea. It’s meant as a heuristic when you can’t know how someone else might want to be treated, or when you are making a decision that might affect other people without full information of who they are or what they want.
Part of the reason we teach it to kids so that they can have an understanding that their actions affect other people to the same extent that other people affect them.
I disagree that it is encapsulated into the golden rule for everyone’s understanding of the golden rule.
The golden rule is fine for kids that are too young to think more abstractly than “how would I feel if…”, but at some point you have to learn that how other people might want to be treated is different from how you want to be treated.