An alternative to the “Golden� or “Platinum� rules

[Zzyzx]

.
Shortcomings of the so-called Golden and Platinum rules have been discussed in a current C&A thread.

Here is a different 'rule' I use for myself (not pushed onto others):

'Treat everyone with a measure of respect and trust just for being a fellow human being. Allow them to earn more or less by their actions (and to an extent, their words).' Many earn less (sometimes very rapidly).

If I interact with a person significantly, I will likely learn something of what they desire for themselves. However, that does not obligate me to provide what they want or need -- though I might provide some things in some cases, without feeling obligated to do so.

Those who do not like my style of interaction (or who cannot earn my respect and trust) are encouraged to go elsewhere to have their needs met and to find people who will accommodate them.


Seem reasonable?

[Zzyzx]

.
The rule 'treat others as you want to be treated' doesn't work well in my case. Not many want to be treated as I do – left alone. I want people to stay away (with few, carefully chosen exceptions). I don't need or want from others – money, material items, company, approval, motivation, entertainment, support, assistance or advice (unless specifically requested), etc. I am not anti-social, but am decidedly 'selectively-social'.

The rule 'treat others as they want to be treated' fails by assuming knowledge of how people want to be treated AND by dictating to interact with each person by THEIR preferences. I, for one, am unwilling to commit to 'playing by someone's rules.' If they need or want to be fawned-over, excused for a lifetime of poor decisions, treated with adoration, granted unearned respect, etc they are unlikely to find any of that in associating with me (and are unwise to try).

Do I 'judge' (evaluate) people with whom I interact? You bet I do. There are vast differences between people in all sorts of personal characteristics – and I certainly feel no obligation to treat everyone alike (or the same, or equally). I realize that some people are NOT worthy of trust, are not responsible, are not truthful, etc; while others are trustworthy (to varying degrees), responsible, truthful, etc. What sort of silliness would have me treat a known conman / scam artist the same as I treat the lady who selflessly runs a soup kitchen feeding those in need?

I do not owe anyone my friendship or association (or even 'the time of day'). A mentor long ago gave me good advice – 'Choose friends and associates wisely because they WILL affect your life; some positively, some negatively, some a little, some a lot. It is up to you to choose.'

I have no need to be friends with (or associate with) everyone, so I choose friends and associates purposefully and NOT based on happenstance. My time and energy are not infinite and are not wasted in directions I consider inappropriate.

[Bust Nak]

Sounds a bit like the silver rule: One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated.

[Volbrigade]

[Replying to post 2 by Zzyzx]

Lots of "I"s in those two posts, my friend.

The Golden Rule is directed to "the other".

You like to be left alone? Leave others alone.

You like to be treated kindly, fairly, with compassion?

Treat others with kindness, fairness, and compassion.

These concepts are of a piece with the other lynchpins of Christian social morality:

"love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." (Mt. 22:37)

And how, exactly, DO I "love myself"?

Do I think I'm a splendid fellow, and should be accorded consideration based on my superlative qualities? To paraphrase C. S. Lewis -- yes, I'm afraid at times I do. And those are probably among my worst moments.

In more lucid ones, I am painfully aware of what a miserable sinner I am, and the kinds of thoughts I am capable of harboring, and the words and actions that follow from them -- not all of them restrained by my will.

But one thing I always seem to find room for, with regard to myself: I always seem to manage to forgive myself, no matter what. After all, it's never entirely my fault. "If x, y, and z hadn't of happened, then I never would have done x1, y1, and z1."

This ties in with the condition of our own forgiveness -- "forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive those who trespass against us."

Forgiveness is at the center of Christianity. This idea of forgiving our enemies, of blessing them, of forgiving others when they do us wrong -- it is the most revolutionary social concept ever advanced. And the final word in societal evolution.

It cannot help but improve families, and thus communities, and thus society, and thus the world.

It is also humanly impossible to practice, without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

"Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." - Gilbert K. Chesterton

[bluethread]

And how, exactly, DO I "love myself"?

Do I think I'm a splendid fellow, and should be accorded consideration based on my superlative qualities?

That is indeed the context of the passage that Yeshua was referencing when he noted that commandment. Lev. 19:17-18 “Do not hate a fellow Israelite in your heart. Rebuke your neighbor frankly so you will not share in their guilt. Do not seek revenge or bear a grudge against anyone among your people, but love your neighbor as yourself. I am the LORD." Yeshua also pointed out that frankly rebuking and not bearing a grudge, does not exempt one from the commandments to provide for those who are in distress, but includes that.

[Zzyzx]

.

Lots of "I"s in those two posts, my friend.

The Golden Rule is directed to "the other".

Correction: The Ethic of Reciprocity ('Golden Rule") relates to how 'I' want to be treated and assumes that others want to be treated likewise.

You like to be left alone? Leave others alone.

Exactly. That is what I do.

However, many others DON'T want to be left alone. They want attention, money, food, etc from me. I do NOT want such things from anyone. Should I 'leave them alone' and not provide any more than I want from others?

In fact, some seem offended that I do not wish to interact with or associate with them (leave them alone – leave me alone / mind your own business and I will mine mine).

You like to be treated kindly, fairly, with compassion?

Treat others with kindness, fairness, and compassion.

Exactly. That is what I do.

However, others often do not reciprocate (including Christians – here in the Bible Belt).

These concepts are of a piece with the other lynchpins of Christian social morality:

"love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." (Mt. 22:37)

And how, exactly, DO I "love myself"?

Beats me. That is your story, not mine.

Perhaps consult a psychiatrist?

Do I think I'm a splendid fellow, and should be accorded consideration based on my superlative qualities? To paraphrase C. S. Lewis -- yes, I'm afraid at times I do. And those are probably among my worst moments.

In more lucid ones, I am painfully aware of what a miserable sinner I am, and the kinds of thoughts I am capable of harboring, and the words and actions that follow from them -- not all of them restrained by my will.

Condolences. Do not assume that others share your condition. I decidedly do not.

But one thing I always seem to find room for, with regard to myself: I always seem to manage to forgive myself, no matter what. After all, it's never entirely my fault. "If x, y, and z hadn't of happened, then I never would have done x1, y1, and z1."

That sounds like excuse-making.

Forgiveness is at the center of Christianity. This idea of forgiving our enemies, of blessing them, of forgiving others when they do us wrong -- it is the most revolutionary social concept ever advanced. And the final word in societal evolution.

Talk is cheap.

It cannot help but improve families, and thus communities, and thus society, and thus the world.

Are Christian families, communities, societies 'improved' over Non-Christian families, communities, societies?

It is also humanly impossible to practice, without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

It appears to be 'impossible to practice' even WITH the supposed 'guidance of the HS. Christians seem no more able and willing to forgive others (including enemies) than anyone else.

"Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." - Gilbert K. Chesterton

Perhaps, by that measure, 70% of the US population that claims to be Christian has 'not tried'

[Volbrigade]

[Replying to post 6 by Zzyzx]

Let's start with this:

Volbrigade wrote:

"Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried." - Gilbert K. Chesterton

Perhaps, by that measure, 70% of the US population that claims to be Christian has 'not tried'

There's no "perhaps" about it. I think we've discussed this before. Checking a box on a survey form is not what makes you a Christian. Going to Church does not. Acting nice does not. Thinking Jesus is a cool guy does not. Nor does having parents or grandparents that did any of those things.

You cannot be born a Christian. You must become one, by a conscious act of the will, the choosing to accept the grace and mercy afforded by Jesus Christ, and to repent of your sinful condition, in becoming a redeemed and regenerate "new creation", that has passed from death into eternal life.

I know of no poll that surveys the percentage of people that applies to; and doubt it is something that can be accurately measured.

I would put the percentage of people in this country that it does apply to at closer to 7% than 70. Since I have no concrete data to back that up, I can only appeal to common sense.

Volbrigade wrote:

Lots of "I"s in those two posts, my friend.

The Golden Rule is directed to "the other".

Correction: The Ethic of Reciprocity ('Golden Rule") relates to how 'I' want to be treated and assumes that others want to be treated likewise.

Correction: your statement is not a "correction". The Golden Rule is equally about "the other" and "you". It is like a pair of scissors -- one scissor is useless.

It does make some assumptions about how we all want to be treated. Does anyone want to be lied to? Cheated? Assaulted? Shunned? Persecuted? Gossiped about? Lied about? Etc.

But the Golden Rule is a perfection of the "Silver" one, which is passive -- "do NOT do unto others..."

The Golden Rule is active.

Does anyone NOT want to be treated fairly? Kindly? Compassionately? Truthfully?

So -- "go and DO likewise".

Volbrigade wrote:

You like to be left alone? Leave others alone.

Exactly. That is what I do.

However, many others DON'T want to be left alone. They want attention, money, food, etc from me. I do NOT want such things from anyone. Should I 'leave them alone' and not provide any more than I want from others?

In fact, some seem offended that I do not wish to interact with or associate with them (leave them alone – leave me alone / mind your own business and I will mine mine).

Of course there's always going to be conflicting agendas. People are different. Some people are social and gregarious, and naturally want to treat others in a social and gregarious manner. Others are more solitary, even reclusive. Here is where good will and kindness, and manners, are needed for a civil society. No one has the right to DEMAND anyone else's time, or money. That, strictly speaking, is a form of theft. And "thou shalt not steal".

Volbrigade wrote:

You like to be treated kindly, fairly, with compassion?

Treat others with kindness, fairness, and compassion.

Exactly. That is what I do.

However, others often do not reciprocate (including Christians – here in the Bible Belt).

Bummer, isn't it?

I think you can file that under "that's life."

And yes, even Christians -- genuine, redeemed, instructed, regenerate ones -- can act pretty lousy sometimes. We are not perfect -- but we are "saved". Still, forgiveness remains essential. "If your brother sins against you 70 times 7 times..."

Volbrigade wrote:

These concepts are of a piece with the other lynchpins of Christian social morality:

"love the LORD your God with all your heart, all your soul, and all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." (Mt. 22:37)

And how, exactly, DO I "love myself"?

Beats me. That is your story, not mine.

Perhaps consult a psychiatrist?

Volbrigade wrote:

Do I think I'm a splendid fellow, and should be accorded consideration based on my superlative qualities? To paraphrase C. S. Lewis -- yes, I'm afraid at times I do. And those are probably among my worst moments.

In more lucid ones, I am painfully aware of what a miserable sinner I am, and the kinds of thoughts I am capable of harboring, and the words and actions that follow from them -- not all of them restrained by my will.

Condolences. Do not assume that others share your condition. I decidedly do not.

You are perhaps one of the "virtuous pagans" that I come across rather frequently in my message board wanderings (as well as in "real life").

There are none that can match the virtuousness of the virtuous pagan. They do not sin. They never commit an objectionable act, or even harbor a unvirtuous thought or emotion. They, like Mary Poppins, are "practically perfect in every way".

And if you don't believe it, just ask them.

It is not for these that Christ came to redeem. "I have come to call not those who think they are righteous, but those who know they are sinners." (Mark 2:17)

It must be a terrible burden for such virtuous folks to have to put up with us sinners, who compose perhaps 99.999% of the human race.

But that is the burden that the faultless must bear.

Except -- perhaps they do possess one tiny little "fault" --

if being tiresomely haughty can be considered one.

Volbrigade wrote:

But one thing I always seem to find room for, with regard to myself: I always seem to manage to forgive myself, no matter what. After all, it's never entirely my fault. "If x, y, and z hadn't of happened, then I never would have done x1, y1, and z1."

That sounds like excuse-making.

Very astute!

Volbrigade wrote:

Forgiveness is at the center of Christianity. This idea of forgiving our enemies, of blessing them, of forgiving others when they do us wrong -- it is the most revolutionary social concept ever advanced. And the final word in societal evolution.

Talk is cheap.

Wow! I never heard that one before. An insightful perception -- I'll try to remember it!

Volbrigade wrote:

It cannot help but improve families, and thus communities, and thus society, and thus the world.

Are Christian families, communities, societies 'improved' over Non-Christian families, communities, societies?

Yes.

Volbrigade wrote:

It is also humanly impossible to practice, without the guidance of the Holy Spirit.

It appears to be 'impossible to practice' even WITH the supposed 'guidance of the HS. Christians seem no more able and willing to forgive others (including enemies) than anyone else.

Well -- virtuous as you are, your perception may be a little flawed here, if by "Christian" you mean "70% of the US population".

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 7:

Perhaps, by that measure, 70% of the US population that claims to be Christian has 'not tried'.

There's no "perhaps" about it. I think we've discussed this before. Checking a box on a survey form is not what makes you a Christian. Going to Church does not. Acting nice does not. Thinking Jesus is a cool guy does not. Nor does having parents or grandparents that did any of those things.

You cannot be born a Christian. You must become one, by a conscious act of the will
...

Does it take a conscious act of will to check off (or on) a check-box?

Cause that's where your argument runs it right off the rails.

[Volbrigade]

From Post 7:

Perhaps, by that measure, 70% of the US population that claims to be Christian has 'not tried'.

There's no "perhaps" about it. I think we've discussed this before. Checking a box on a survey form is not what makes you a Christian. Going to Church does not. Acting nice does not. Thinking Jesus is a cool guy does not. Nor does having parents or grandparents that did any of those things.

You cannot be born a Christian. You must become one, by a conscious act of the will
...

Does it take a conscious act of will to check off (or on) a check-box?

Cause that's where your argument runs it right off the rails.

Perhaps there is point to your post. But it eludes me.

Care to elucidate it a bit more clearly?

[Bust Nak]

Of course there's always going to be conflicting agendas. People are different. Some people are social and gregarious, and naturally want to treat others in a social and gregarious manner. Others are more solitary, even reclusive.

And this is where the golden rule fails. It does not take into account of that people are different. It assumes other wants to be treated the way you want to be treated. A pretty good assumption most of the time, because like you asked, who doesn't want to be treated kindly, fairly or with compassion? But this is not an absolute.