Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

For discussions of culture, politics, economics, sociology, law, business and any other topic that falls under the social science remit.

Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ichthus77 » Tue May 24, 2022 1:36 pm

Replying to Iambiguous' repeated 4 criteria all over ILP:

1] a demonstrable proof of the existence of your God, your Kingdom, your spiritual path

He knows you need it to be obvious before you ask. Be careful what you wish for. The evidence is staggering, but this is on another level, isn't it? And he will meet you where you're at. You can know all there is to know (intellectually) and still have difficulty trusting it (know nothing).

2] addressing the fact that down through the ages hundreds of Gods, Kingdoms and spiritual paths to immortality and salvation were/are championed...but only one of which [if any] can be the true path. So why yours?

First, because he met me where I was at 9/22/05, and still does. Second, because he makes sense of all the questions. Who else has died to prove he is who he says he is, loves as he says he loves, and rose from the dead and still does wacky junk? Before that date I just wrote, I would've been like, ikr? Except nobody said ikr back then.

3] addressing the profoundly problematic role that dasein plays in any particular individual's belief in Gods, Kingdoms of Ends and spiritual paths

We are incomplete/imperfect. He is complete/whole. Diversity/creativity is good in line with completion/wholeness. His wholeness is love despite our imperfection, motivating us to love each other likewise.

4] the questions that revolve around theodicy and your own particular God, Kingdom or spiritual path

Without the possibility for pain, we can't learn the "overcoming" sort of love that is the point for which we hunger and which describes God. And with this pain he is no stranger. Count it all joy.

Now I'm replying to this comment in the Harmonic Triads thread: https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.p ... 4#p2856480

iambiguous wrote:
Ichthus77 wrote:
iambiguous wrote:self = other

As when, for example, Christ said, "but I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you"?

How about a context to bring the Harmonic Triads down to Earth?


Yes - the transcultural Golden Rule or royal law of love (cooperation, correspondence, etc…) found in every major culture in history in various forms.


Note to others:

Well, I had to try, right?

Perhaps Urwrong will bring it all down to Earth.


As for the Golden Rule, believe it or not, there are criticisms of it:

The main criticism that people mention when it comes to the golden rule, and particularly when it comes to its implementation in practice, is the fact that the golden rule suggests that others would like to be treated the same way you would like to be treated, which is not necessarily true.

This can lead to problematic situations, where one person might mistreat someone else under the guidance of the golden rule. For example, this problem could lead someone to make an overt romantic gesture toward someone that isn’t interested in it, simply because the person making the gesture wishes that someone would do the same for them.

This issue has been described by writer George Bernard Shaw, who famously said:

“Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may be not be the same.”

To address this issue, a variant of the golden rule has been developed, which is called the platinum rule, and which denotes that you should treat others the way they want to be treated.

However, this principle has also been criticized, for example because it can lead to issues in cases where it prompts you to act toward someone in a way that contradicts your own values. Furthermore, there are cases where it’s not possible to use the platinum rule, for example when you have no way of knowing what the other person wants, or where the golden rule leads to better outcomes, for example when it prompts someone to display more empathy in practice. As such, the platinum rule is not inherently better than the golden rule, and there are cases where it’s preferable to use the two rules together, or to use the golden rule by itself.

Note: the platinum rule is sometimes referred to by other names, such as the copper rule or the inversion of the golden rule.

Conflict with other principles

Another notable criticism of the golden rule is the fact that, in certain situations, its application can lead to undesirable outcomes, when it conflicts with other guiding principles, including both moral principles as well as other types of principles, such as social or legal ones.

For example, if someone is convicted of a crime and sentenced to prison, the golden rule would suggest that we should let them go, because we would not want to be imprisoned ourselves. This remains the case even if we use the platinum rule, since the prisoner would likely also prefer to avoid going to prison.

However, this issue with the golden rule can be dealt with in a general manner, by viewing this principle as one of several principles that we use to guide our behavior as individuals and as a society.

Specifically, in the example described above, the golden rule would not be enough to prevent that person from going to prison, because most individuals and societies choose to place other laws and ethical principles above the golden rule, while still taking the golden rule into account. This means that they strive to implement the golden rule whenever possible, as long as it doesn’t clash with the implementation of a more important concept.

This notion is described, for example, in the writing of philosopher Henry More, who said that:

“The Evil you would not have done to your self, you must abstain from doing the same to another, as far as may be done without prejudice to a Third.”

— In Enchiridion Ethicum (1667), Chap. 4, Noema XV


Effectiviology website

So, given particular contexts, let's explore the Harmonic Triads in regard to this.


I did a little work on The Golden Synthesis between character (virtue), conduct (duty), and consequences (teleology) this semester:
https://ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=197946 (if anyone wants to discuss just the golden synthesis)

It's not one of "several principles" -- it is the principle of principles. It rightly orders all the others. All the others boil down or add up to it. It is true to God's nature, and a hunger for it/God (wholeness) is in us - that's why it is found transculturally (pivot of the dao and all that).

All the different versions of the Golden Rule... platinum, etc.... if they're legit, they're just the Golden Rule correctly understood/applied. If there is a criticism against the Golden Rule, it is because it hasn't been fully understood, or is just rejected as it is. Any rule or diversity/creativity that is legit will be in line with it. We are all selves, we are all others, so all of our values, rules, virtues are in question if they are not in line with the Golden Rule. That's how you bring objectivism down out of the clouds and root it in dasein, because it is centered on the Subject we all are (in the image of). We just talk it out with anyone who would be impacted and smooth off the rough edges until we reach a livable agreement. self/us=other/them

So, to address particular points above:

Iambiguous: "The main criticism that people mention when it comes to the golden rule, and particularly when it comes to its implementation in practice, is the fact that the golden rule suggests that others would like to be treated the same way you would like to be treated, which is not necessarily true."

Talk it out. Ask what they want. If it's not something you would want, keep having a conversation about it that treats everyone as a self.

Iambiguous: "This can lead to problematic situations, where one person might mistreat someone else under the guidance of the golden rule. For example, this problem could lead someone to make an overt romantic gesture toward someone that isn’t interested in it, simply because the person making the gesture wishes that someone would do the same for them."

This is the era of the #metoo movement when everyone is terrified of getting charged with sexual harassment. And everyone is getting released from jail (but there are worse things than jail, if one even goes to jail for that). It was the most cautious of times. It was the most liberating of times. There are moves I would have made in hindsight had I known what was wanted. But..should I have? I'm not talking merely overt romantic gestures. So maybe being blind to it was a good thing. Or maybe my values need reexamining. Until then, no moves. Unless he moves first. Confession. That's just where I'm at. I never claimed to be perfect. Sadly, he won't move. And I can't move on. Good thing I'm too busy to notice most the time. For now. I've told myself (and him) I'll give up hoping at a certain point I am not at liberty to disclose here. I've already started giving up hope in preparation. But I'm anchored beyond the veil. Still, I wouldn't make any bets either way. I've got a history. Heh!! TMI, but real.

Iambiguous: "This issue has been described by writer George Bernard Shaw, who famously said: 'Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may be not be the same.'"

Hence, talking about it to discover their tastes, and make sure they are in line with the Golden Rule before granting wishes.

Iambiguous: "To address this issue, a variant of the golden rule has been developed, which is called the platinum rule, and which denotes that you should treat others the way they want to be treated."

The Golden Rule is not about everyone/anyone getting whatever they want. It's about all treating each other as selves/others. All stakeholders on equal footing in negotiations. If how someone says they want to be treated also treats someone else poorly, it violates the Golden Rule. Everyone has to be following it. It's an iron sharpens iron thing. No one self takes priority.

Iambiguous: "However, this principle has also been criticized, for example because it can lead to issues in cases where it prompts you to act toward someone in a way that contradicts your own values. Furthermore, there are cases where it’s not possible to use the platinum rule, for example when you have no way of knowing what the other person wants, or where the golden rule leads to better outcomes, for example when it prompts someone to display more empathy in practice. As such, the platinum rule is not inherently better than the golden rule, and there are cases where it’s preferable to use the two rules together, or to use the golden rule by itself. Note: the platinum rule is sometimes referred to by other names, such as the copper rule or the inversion of the golden rule."

I've already addressed these issues in replies above. Talk it out. Every self is an other and vice versa. We smooth off our rough edges. If all stakeholders are in agreement, or have been given due consideration in their absence, at the end of the conversation, the deal is good.

Iambiguous: "Another notable criticism of the golden rule is the fact that, in certain situations, its application can lead to undesirable outcomes, when it conflicts with other guiding principles, including both moral principles as well as other types of principles, such as social or legal ones. For example, if someone is convicted of a crime and sentenced to prison, the golden rule would suggest that we should let them go, because we would not want to be imprisoned ourselves. This remains the case even if we use the platinum rule, since the prisoner would likely also prefer to avoid going to prison."

It is the principle of principles -- all other principles that are not in line with it are not actual principles and do not obligate. The Golden Rule would not suggest we let the prisoner go. The prisoner is only one self in conversation with others, and did not consider those others when they broke the law (assuming the law was in line with the Golden Rule). I'm restraining myself from saying something stupid right here. You're welcome.

Iambiguous: "However, this issue with the golden rule can be dealt with in a general manner, by viewing this principle as one of several principles that we use to guide our behavior as individuals and as a society."

It is the principle of principles. Principles not in line with it are nihil.

Iambiguous: "Specifically, in the example described above, the golden rule would not be enough to prevent that person from going to prison, because most individuals and societies choose to place other laws and ethical principles above the golden rule, while still taking the golden rule into account. This means that they strive to implement the golden rule whenever possible, as long as it doesn’t clash with the implementation of a more important concept."

It's not other laws and ethical principles, and there is no more important concept. All legislation is just further elaboration and application of the Golden Rule, or it's nihil that does not obligate. Jesus would have a lot of endless ways of doing his "You have heard it said... but I say to you..." regarding today's laws. But he called the Golden Rule the sum of the Law and the Prophets...which apparently does not extend to things like Moses permitting divorce, which Jesus corrected. He sets the bar higher before he dies in our place to prove he never held it against us. Fricken badass.
Fall semester ends 12/16/22. Apologies if I do not reply immediately.

“In choosing myself, I choose the other.”
- A marriage of Sartre & Levinas

“ Gloria Dei est vivens homo. “
Trans.: The glory of God is man fully alive.
- Irenaeus
User avatar
Ichthus77
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6133
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: pale blue clump of star particles

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ecmandu » Tue May 24, 2022 2:32 pm

Ichthus.

I’m going to be extremely straight forward with you.

Iambiguous is worried about things iambiguous doesn’t need to be worried about. This philosophy is a defense mechanism against hell realms.

It won’t work.

What does work is stuff neither you or iambiguous refuse to realize.

Existence needs to be changed structurally:

It’s a fools errand to try to change a mind.

I’m leaving soon.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Meno_ » Tue May 24, 2022 2:40 pm

But the fool(idiot) on the hill means something, meant something to his mother that bore him^, and the idiot did things unwillingly. Yet compelled.( sorry; ex cathedra)
Meno_
The Invisible One
 
Posts: 13311
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ecmandu » Tue May 24, 2022 3:08 pm

Meno.

Don’t worry about it.

I can remote control existence at will now.

At the end of the day.

I leave the decision to each of you.

I’m not a god.

I’m not a name known on this planet.

I’m a being beyond space and time that lived in my eternal heaven and was brought out of it.

I chose the name Jason here because I thought it’d be funny.

I’m just passing through Meno.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ichthus77 » Tue May 24, 2022 3:08 pm

I’m sorry. I had to beat my brain into submission to write my philosophy of mind paper. If I’m supposed to be able to understand Ec & and Meno_ right now it will have to wait until my brain switches back over to its normal mode. lol
Fall semester ends 12/16/22. Apologies if I do not reply immediately.

“In choosing myself, I choose the other.”
- A marriage of Sartre & Levinas

“ Gloria Dei est vivens homo. “
Trans.: The glory of God is man fully alive.
- Irenaeus
User avatar
Ichthus77
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6133
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: pale blue clump of star particles

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ecmandu » Tue May 24, 2022 3:13 pm

Ichthus77 wrote:I’m sorry. I had to beat my brain into submission to write my philosophy of mind paper. If I’m supposed to be able to understand Ec & and Meno_ right now it will have to wait until my brain switches back over to its normal mode. lol



Don’t worry about it.

All you need to know about philosophy of mind is that it’s a feedback loop. And that eternal forms are the only things in existence that aren’t sentient.
The purpose of life is to give everyone individually what they always want at the expense of no being - forever.

The biggest problem of life is the, “hey, I don’t want this to be happening” problem for everyone.

Welcome to thinking.
Ecmandu
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 16011
Joined: Thu Dec 11, 2014 1:22 am
Location: Duh. Existence. I'm sure that'd be wrong on SAT's!

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby iambiguous » Tue May 24, 2022 4:08 pm

Note to others:

Just for the record, as with the Kids and the pinheads and the yak yak yakkers here, I don't read her posts anymore.

I only clicked on it because [sigh] I am the "subject" of the thread.

On the other hand, sure, my own reaction to her is just another hopelessly subjective manifestation of dasein. Others may have actual respect for her religious views and react otherwise. And that works for me.

Anyway, if you do come across a point she raises that you consider interesting or intriguing enough to warrant my attention, by all means, point it out to me.
He was like a man who wanted to change all; and could not; so burned with his impotence; and had only me, an infinitely small microcosm to convert or detest. John Fowles

Start here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=176529
Then here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 5&t=185296
And here: http://www.ilovephilosophy.com/viewtopi ... 1&t=194382

"Sure, it works in practice, but does it work in theory?"

Danny Embling: "People wonder how Hitler managed to get so many followers...it's never surprised me."
User avatar
iambiguous
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 46425
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2010 8:03 pm
Location: hanging out with godot

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ichthus77 » Tue May 24, 2022 5:32 pm

Keep “her” out of your other posts then ya passive aggressive … okay…. no, this is fine.

This girl has a question. Had her hand up
some time now:
Attachments
3F9FE1F1-E883-42CD-8084-EA3A9DA1DB32.jpeg
3F9FE1F1-E883-42CD-8084-EA3A9DA1DB32.jpeg (42.46 KiB) Viewed 231 times
Fall semester ends 12/16/22. Apologies if I do not reply immediately.

“In choosing myself, I choose the other.”
- A marriage of Sartre & Levinas

“ Gloria Dei est vivens homo. “
Trans.: The glory of God is man fully alive.
- Irenaeus
User avatar
Ichthus77
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6133
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: pale blue clump of star particles

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Meno_ » Tue May 24, 2022 5:51 pm

Oh yes, she asks why the attention when mom and dad left and now here? and I'm scared (scarred) of ..


What... the mad tea party.. that's it.
Meno_
The Invisible One
 
Posts: 13311
Joined: Tue Dec 08, 2015 2:39 am
Location: Mysterium Tremendum

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ichthus77 » Tue May 24, 2022 5:59 pm

Ecmandu wrote:
Ichthus77 wrote:I’m sorry. I had to beat my brain into submission to write my philosophy of mind paper. If I’m supposed to be able to understand Ec & and Meno_ right now it will have to wait until my brain switches back over to its normal mode. lol



Don’t worry about it.

All you need to know about philosophy of mind is that it’s a feedback loop. And that eternal forms are the only things in existence that aren’t sentient.


Plato is either misunderstood or deliberately misrepresented to avoid triggering snowflakes. Nuclear ones, maybe. It feels good to be able to express that here, despite not “knowing enough”. Only prob is I’ve heard a very respected and usually correct teacher (not at my university) mess up Plato. It’s like nails on a chalkboard. On purpose? Sometimes it does almost feel like a set up.
Fall semester ends 12/16/22. Apologies if I do not reply immediately.

“In choosing myself, I choose the other.”
- A marriage of Sartre & Levinas

“ Gloria Dei est vivens homo. “
Trans.: The glory of God is man fully alive.
- Irenaeus
User avatar
Ichthus77
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6133
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: pale blue clump of star particles

Re: Golden Rule (reply to Iambiguous) - all welcome

Postby Ichthus77 » Tue May 24, 2022 6:48 pm

Meno_ wrote:Oh yes, she asks why the attention when mom and dad left and now here? and I'm scared (scarred) of ..


What... the mad tea party.. that's it.


Two years ago today, misterkeys.

[edit: 4. I no do math.]
Fall semester ends 12/16/22. Apologies if I do not reply immediately.

“In choosing myself, I choose the other.”
- A marriage of Sartre & Levinas

“ Gloria Dei est vivens homo. “
Trans.: The glory of God is man fully alive.
- Irenaeus
User avatar
Ichthus77
ILP Legend
 
Posts: 6133
Joined: Fri Sep 22, 2006 6:48 pm
Location: pale blue clump of star particles


Return to Society, Government, and Economics



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users