Golden Rule: Pure Garbage?

willmarite

On another thread a poster made the comment that the golden rule was garbage. She said it was arrogant and made assumptions.

I didn't want to derail that thread so I started another wondering if this is a common thought about this belief on this forum. I guess I naively thought the value of doing to others as you want them to do to you was generally accepted as positive.

I understand people have different opinions of Jesus as a person but I don't want to get into that here. What about the teaching called the golden rule itself? Is it just garbage?

Island Man

Here's what's wrong with the golden rule:

Different people like to be treated differently. The way John likes being treated may be an annoyance to me. So if John follows the golden rule by treating me the way he wants to be treated, he would be a pain in the ass to me.

The golden rule ignores human individuality. It leads one to act presumptuously by projecting ones own preferences onto others. The Diamond Rule is superior: "treat others the way they would want to be treated."

Imagine being the guest in the home of someone of some exotic culture and he offers you what is considered the delicacy in his culture and which he loves. With the Golden Rule mindset, your host expects you to love the meal because he loves it and is giving you with the expectation that you will love it too. With that mindset, your host could easily be offended if you genuinely do not like the meal and stop eating after the first bite. The Golden Rule facilitates such taking of offense because it projects your own preferences onto others. By contrast, if the host had the Diamond Rule mindset, he wouldn't presume to project his own likes onto you. He may offer you a small sample of their delicacy to see if you like it, and if you don't he wouldn't take offense because the Diamond Rule acknowledges that we have different preferences and seeks to know the preferences of others instead of presumptuously projecting our own preference onto them.

The Golden Rule has a form of love that proves to be somewhat superficial. The love of the Golden Rule is not genuinely interested in the person - for it does not seek to ascertain the person's preferences so as to know how to treat them. It overlooks this because it is more interested in proving itself righteous and so presumes, egotistically to project the giver's own preference onto the person.

By contrast, the Diamond Rule shows personal interest by ascertaining the preference of the person so as to know how to treat them. It shows genuine personal interest instead of focusing on proving the lover righteous at the expense of overlooking the preferences of the one being loved.

The Golden Rule is proof that the book of Matthew is not the inspired word of a superior all wise God whose thoughts are superior to our own. In fact, the Golden Rule is not even original to the bible but has been expressed by others living before the time of Jesus.

The Golden Rule is what some might call a "deepity" - a pithy saying that has an air of charisma to it but upon closer scrutiny proves to lack an intelligible meaning or the great depth of insight or substance it pretends to have. Charismatic sounding slogans tend to be like that. True wisdom is often very lacking in charismatic appeal.

Viviane

I guess I naively thought the value of doing to others as you want them to do to you was generally accepted as positive.

Correct.

What about the teaching called the golden rule itself? Is it just garbage?

Yes, it's arrogant and presumptive.

Rather than assume people want the same thing you want, you could always ask them. For instance, just because person A likes for random strangers to stick a finger in his poop chute doesn't mean that he can assume everyone likes that and run around doing it.

Just because person B loves shrimp dinners doesn't mean he can assume every does, they may not like it or be allergic or have religious objections.

Far better to simply ask how people would like to be treated.

a watcher

It's a universal virtue.

Do unto others...

What goes around, comes around.

Karma.

cappytan

Rather than assume people want the same thing you want, you could always ask them.

I think the Golden Rule doesn't omit this. I would want someone to ask me how I would like to be treated instead of just assuming. This is in line with the Golden rule.

Village Idiot

Island Man, "treat others the way they would want to be treated."

What if they want to be worshipped as gods?

stuckinarut2

Interesting thread!

I had not thought of things like this before...but it makes perfect sense now.

The "diamond rule" sounds much better!

millie210

Empathy is something easy to feel for someone we care for.

Applying that to all fellow humans as a principle even if they are unknown to us personally makes life easier for all.

The "golden rule" is just another way of stating that.

Twitch

I guess I naively thought the value of doing to others as you want them to do to you was generally accepted as positive.

It is generally accepted as positive and you are not naive for thinking so. Just because someone has a different opinion on it doesn't make you naive or the idea less valid.

As mentioned, it's the beginning of empathy and consideration for those beyond your immediate circle of people. It's general politeness and courtesy to others and doesn't need to be more complicated than that. Besides, the way some people act towards others and like to be treated is not something I am capable of or wish to be like. So I defer to just being me and do the best I can with respect to others. Somewhere along the line, common ground can hopefully be found, and if the effort is appreciated, it usually is.

steve2

I've known some perfectly lovely men whom I have wanted to do unto me as I would wish I could do unto them. However - and I am mildly embarrassed to note - I suspect they would hold an entirely different view of that precept. I thus rest my case against the Golden Rule.

Golden Rule: Pure Garbage?

Share this