The Golden Rule

There's a widespread adolescent need in America right now to explode the past, tear down received wisdom, and build something brand new. How many bestselling books have proclaimed in the past twenty years that some received wisdom or common sense view is - guess what? - totally false! Here, look, we're told, a researcher at a good university took thirty volunteers and divided them into two groups and discovered that, VOILA, something we've always believed is NOT TRUE AT ALL. The book reporting this hits number one and there's a TED Talk, and lots of TV. And speeches, highly paid speeches in front of huge crowds telling them how they've always been wrong about such a basic thing! Wow, everyone thinks. And then, after all the noise has quieted down, it's revealed by someone who gets NO media attention that the original study was deeply flawed and not replicable, and that, maybe the old view is right after all. 

I just came across an article in INC with the title "Screw the Golden Rule." Yep. The Golden Rule is all wrong, because it tells us to treat others the way WE would want to be treated. But guess what? THOSE OTHERS are not US! Oh, my goodness. Did no scholar or sage or saint ever realize that before now? How could they have all been so dim? How could I?

The article tells us that the Golden Rule makes every moral choice all about us, and our ego and what we want, rather than about the others we're supposed to be treating well. That old antiquated rule tells us to force on others what we like, whether they'd like it or not! 

Wow! How come nobody ever saw this??? Jeepers!!!

Actually, a business writer suggested this line of reasoning many years ago and quickly recommended that what we really need is not one of the many forms of the actual Golden Rule revered across cultures and down through the centuries, but his own new formulation of a "PLATINUM RULE." It's Better than Gold, see? "Treat others the way they want to be treated!" That's the rule! Now, was that so hard?

But wait. Let's think about this new and purportedly superior rule for a second. "Treat others the way they want to be treated." So: If another person wants to be treated in a very unfairly preferential way, should a core moral guideline instruct me to do so? Certainly not. And if the other person is a masochist, should such a chief moral rule turn me into a sadist? Well, that would be crazy.

The original Golden Rule hasn't survived countless centuries and even millennia in its traditional forms despite being stupid advice. It's not stupid, but sometimes, we are.

When I get the flu, I want to be checked on, and catered to and brought food and, Ok, pampered. When my wife gets the flu, she wants to be left alone. Do I say, "Wait. The Golden Rule says I should treat her the way I'd want to be treated, so I should bother her constantly!" No. The Golden Rule is not simplistic and moronic. It has to be interpreted, in order to be applied, like anything else. And the best interpretation of a rule like this always begins with the general and then descends to the specific. If I were in my wife's place, I'd generally want to be treated in accordance with all my morally legitimate preferences and concerns. So then I should treat her in accord with hers. That means I should leave her alone, not that I should bother her constantly. Problem solved.

But wait. Can't the Platinum Rule be interpreted the same way? Treat others they way they want to be treated, as long as their preferences and desires are morally legitimate? Sure. But what's the point of abandoning the classic formulations of gold in favor of the new thing? It's original justification has been lost. Plus, something else big is also lost.

The Platinum Rule guides you to simply ask others what they want. The Golden Rule may often involve your doing so as well, as a part of your decision making, but not as the whole thing. The Golden Rule depends in its very formulation on your moral imagination. It asks you to start from within, from where you are, and then imaginatively extrapolate to the other person. What's it like to be that person in that situation? What would it feel like if I were there? It's no accident or coincidence that a chief moral rule appeals to a chief source of human motivation - the imagination. The Platinum Rule utterly lacks that. In addition, The Platinum Rule focuses on the assumption that we're all different and have different preferences. The Golden Rule can acknowledge difference just as well, but prefers to remind us that, at our moral core, and with our highest aspirations, we're all connected, and even perhaps deeply united.

I could go on, but won't. If I were you, or in your position, I wouldn't want to read a lot more right now. So I'll conclude.

Sometimes received wisdom is our currency because it's true and, yes, wise. And we don't need an article, or a book, or a TED Talk to tell us how we've always been wrong.