The golden rule says: ‘Treat others as you want to be treated’. This article organizes contemporary interpretations of the rule into three groups: the ‘material’ golden rule, the ‘relativistic’ golden rule, and the ‘formal’ golden rule. The article also argues that (a) the relativistic golden rule is the weakest, (b) the formal golden rule is virtually irrefutable, (c) the material golden rule is less evident than (...) the formal one, but not necessarily false and (d) the formal golden rule and the material golden rule are not incompatible—they can complement each other. This assumes that the substantive assumptions of the material golden rule are real. (shrink)

The role of the Golden Rule in various systems of thought, both religious and philosophical, invites study. How the logic of a given system interprets the Golden Rule demands analysis. Objective data deriving from empirical study of nature and society deserve close examination.

A new examination of the ethical dictum, ‘The Golden Rule’ exploring its formulation and significance in relation to the world’s major religions.>.

The Golden Rule has received remarkably little philosophical discussion. No book has ever been written on it, and articles devoted to it have been exceedingly few, and usually not very searching. It is usually mentioned, where it is mentioned at all, only in passing, and most of these passing remarks have either been false, trite, or misleading, though some of them, as we shall see, have certainly been interesting enough. Considering its obvious importance and its almost universal acceptance, (...) this dearth of philosophical discussion is unfortunate, and also somewhat surprising. One of the things I hope to show about it, though only incidentally, is that there are problems connected with it of the utmost subtlety, worthy of the attention of even the most minute philosophers. (shrink)

"The golden rule" (Matthew 7:12) is a formulation of natural moral law, a logical way to divide good from evil. It has been attacked by J.W. Hennessey, Jr. and Bernard Gert as a "particularist preachment." On the contrary, it remains a useful, universal guide to moral conduct and cannot be considered a self-centered, subjective guide to the moral life. We must agree with Jeffrey Wattles that there are multiple possible meanings to the "rule", some legitimate and some (...) spurious. The legitimate meanings, such as the "standard of God-like behavior," all yield the same judgment on morally doubtful actions such as forgery. The so-called "platinum" rule, "Do unto others as they would have you do unto them" has face appeal, but is fatally flawed in its logic, and does not supercede "the golden rule" because part of the treatment I wish from others is a full understanding of my true needs and wishes, even when I do not judge my own needs correctly. (shrink)

This book synthesizes the game-theoretic modeling of decision-making processes and an ancient moral requirement, called the Golden Rule of ethics (GR). This rule states, "Behave to others as you would like them to behave to you." The GR is one of the oldest, most widespread and specific moral requirements that appear in Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Buddhism, and Confucianism. The book constructs and justifies mathematical models of dynamic socio-economic processes and phenomena that reveal the mechanism of the GR (...) and are based on the concept of Berge equilibrium. The GR can be naturally used for resolving or balancing conflicts, and its "altruistic character" obviously excludes wars, blood-letting, and armed clashes. The previous book of the authors, The Berge Equilibrium: A Game-Theoretic Framework for the Golden Rule of Ethics, covers the static case of the GR. In this book, the dynamic case of the GR is investigated using the altruistic concept of Berge equilibrium and three factors as follows: a) a modification of N.N. Krasovskii's mathematical formalization of differential positional games (DPGs), in view of the counterexamples given by A.I. Subbotin and A.F. Kononenko; b) the method of guiding control, proposed by N.N. Krasovskii; c) the Germeier convolution of the payoff functions of different players. Additionally, the book features exercises, problems, and solution tips collected together in Appendix 1, as well as new approaches to conflict resolution as presented in Appendices 2-4. The book will be of use to undergraduate and graduate students and experts in the field of decision-making in complex control and management systems, as well as anyone interested in game theory and applications. (shrink)

According to the so-called golden rule, we ought to treat others as we want to be treated by them. This rule, in one form or another, is part of every major religion, and it has been accepted by many philosophers with various ethical views. However, if the literal golden rule is interpreted as an absolute rule, it is problematic. In this paper, I introduce a new version of this famous principle that is similar to (...) various classical definitions. According to this variant, the rule can be formulated in the following way: If you want it to be the case that if x were in your situation and you were in x’s situation then x would do H to you, and you have a good will, then you ought to do H to x. I show how this version can be derived from a small set of highly plausible premises, and I defend it against some of the most interesting and/or common objections against the golden rule in the literature. I conclude that we have good reason to believe in this rendition of the principle. (shrink)

The Golden Rule is regularly used in ordinary life, across many different cultures, to acquire new moral knowledge. At the same time, the Golden Rule is widely ignored both in ethics and metaethics because it seems to be an implausible normative theory. Most philosophers who have paid it any attention have thought that, at best, it is an initially tempting thought whose appeal should be explained by the ultimately correct normative theory. My aim in this paper (...) is to attend to an alternative possibility: the Golden Rule teaches us something about metaethics, in the form of moral epistemology, rather than normative ethics. I will argue that sentimentalism, the view that the emotions are an essential source of moral knowledge, provides a compelling explanation of the usefulness of the Golden Rule. Before giving the sentimentalist explanation, I explain why proposed alternative sources of moral knowledge provide less compelling explanations of its usefulness. (shrink)

This essay explores the correlation between shu 恕 and ren 仁 in Confucius’ teachings and its broader implications concerning the role of the golden rule. It first shows that whereas the golden rule is premised on equality between agent and recipient, Confucius’ correlation of shu with ren aims mainly at establishing a more solid foundation for the hierarchy-specific duty of the ruler to care for the ruled. It thus reveals that this conflict arises from the (...) class='Hi'>golden rule’s incompatibility with asymmetrical relationships, a long-standing issue concerning its validity as a moral axiom. It then addresses this conflict by demonstrating that the golden rule can effectively function in conformity with humanity even in asymmetrical relationships by way of inducing an agent’s viewpoint to shift from existing sociopolitical asymmetry to one-to-one human equality. On this basis, lastly, it examines the concurrence of the ideas of shu, human nature, and ren in ancient China. (shrink)

The Golden Rule, most commonly expressed in the form "do to others what you would have them do to you", has attracted criticism for failing to provide practical guidance in case of moral disagreement and for being susceptible to irrational outcomes. I argue that the alleged limitations are not a defect but just what makes the Golden Rule an effective tool of socio-ontological transformation towards ideal agency.

The traditional Christian version of the Golden Rule, some modern philosophical reformulations, and the Confucian version are compared. It is argued that the Confucian version, in contrast with its Western parallels, is based on shu as bodily or somatic interpersonal care and love, and thus should be understood first of all as a human "way" rather than as a divine rule, a way grounded in the human heart and a way for the human community.

The aim of this article is to defend the morality of the Golden Rule from the objection that it will lead to intolerable paternalism. Once religious paternalism is allowed, Inquisitors come forward to care for the weak-willed and obtuse masses. Eventually, the Inquisitors lose their faith, and focus their concern upon harmony, health, and happiness in this life. The outcome is either a constrained distopia that is abhorrent (Huxley), or a cruel distopia which is the antithesis of what (...) the Golden Rule is supposed to prescribe (Orwell), Paternalism presupposes knowledge that an agent is acting against his own best interests. Such epistemic justification is not available in matters of ethics or faith. (shrink)

A number of philosophers from Hobbes to Mill to Parfit have held some combination of the following views about the Golden Rule: (a) It is the cornerstone of morality across many if not all cultures. (b) It affirms the value of moral impartiality, and potentially the core idea of utilitarianism. (c) It is immune from evolutionary debunking, that is, there is no good naturalistic explanation for widespread acceptance of the Golden Rule, ergo the best explanation for (...) its appearance in different traditions is that people have perceived the same non-natural moral truth. De Lazari-Radek and Singer employ all three of these claims in an argument meant to vindicate Sidgwick's ‘principle of universal benevolence’. I argue that the Golden Rule is the cornerstone of morality only in Christianity, it does not advocate moral impartiality, and there is a naturalistic explanation for why versions of the Golden Rule appear in different traditions. (shrink)

Duties to future persons are central to numerous key ethical issues including contraception, abortion, genetic selection, treatment of the environment, and population control. Nevertheless, we still seem to be lacking Parfit's 'Theory X', a general theory of beneficence whose appropriateness extends to future generations. Starting from the Golden Rule, R. M. Hare purportedly derived counterintuitive duties to potential people and 'the potentiality principle'. However, I argue that Hare's derivation involves a hidden and unjustifiable extension from TGR, and show (...) how the most plausible form of TGR is compatible with multiple contradictory principles for the treatment of future persons. I appeal to our own preferences to argue that one extension of TGR follows the spirit of TGR, while the other is deeply implausible. Using the plausible extension, I derive a Contingent Interests Principle that offers much promise as Parfit's elusive Theory X. In contrast to Hare's interpretation of TGR, this application provides solid justification for rejecting the potentiality principle. (shrink)

The Golden Rule is endorsed in oneform or another by most cultures and majorreligions and is still espoused byphilosophers, business ethicists, and popularbusiness authors. Because it also resonateswith undergraduate business majors, it can bean effective teaching tool. This paperdescribes a way of teaching the Golden Rulethrough a series of business-oriented examplesintended to bring out its strengths andweaknesses. The method described alsointroduces students to some basic moralreasoning skills and acquaints them with a widerange of moral issues that arise (...) in business. Kant's Formula of Humanity is discussed in thefinal section as a principle that overcomes atleast some of the Golden Rule's defects. (shrink)

This paper focuses on the dynamics of ethical perspectives that embody the Golden Rule of Morality. Based on critical analysis of this rule in various cultural and religious contexts, but also from the perspective of humanism, the author presents its paradoxical character, the essence of which is interpreted here in terms of a pointer to metaphysical reality. It turns out that social conditionality, as well as the self-referential concept as a starting point of any ethical reasoning, are (...) serious epistemological challenges for the application of the Golden Rule in the position of universal normativity that this study addresses. On the other hand, Judeo-Christian cosmology and the related basis for ethical foundations is presented here as an inspirational space of ethical reasoning in which the paradoxical character of the Golden Rule becomes rather an indicator of a deeper metaethical interpretation of one's own particular ethical attitudes and outcomes than a practical guide to the discovery of ethical universals. (shrink)

The phenomenon of globalization of markets has been accompanied by calls for a globalization of ethical norms. One principle often referred to in such calls is the so-called Golden Rule. The rule, often stated as Do unto others as you would have others do unto you, has long been used and referenced in the business literature. But those who use it often do so without full realization of the rule itself and what it stands for. This (...) paper examines the history, meaning, and problems of the rule and attempts to show, through a case analysis, how these problems surface when using the rule in a business context. In so doing it attempts to clarify exactly what the rule means and how it can fit into a universal code of morality. (shrink)

Through the development of a comparative analysis that explores the conceptions of the Golden Rule that are expressed in the teachings of Confucius, Christianity and the Hatatas, the article shows that the combined insights that emerge from these three teachings have a contemporary significance in the attempt to develop a complementary learning process with the Other. Throughout its variations, the Golden Rule is grounded on the need to treat others as how we want to be treated. (...) Such a moral vision occupies a central importance in Confucius’s ren, Christianity’s Gospel of Matthew and the commandments, and the Hatatas’ principle of harmony. The comparative exercise in contending conceptions of the Golden Rule that are found in Confucius’, the Christian and the Hatatas’ approaches leads into the emergence of a learning process that goes beyond the mere tolerance of the Other. In a globalized world, where there is a search for a moral guideline that can serve as a common source of motivation, the Golden Rule can serve as a foundation of a process of learning that is mutually supportive, supplementary and is hence complementary. (shrink)

It is commonly accepted that the golden rule—most often formulated as "do unto others as you would have them do unto you"—is a unifying element between many diverse religious traditions, both Eastern and Western. Its influence also extends beyond such traditions, since many non-religious individuals hold up the golden rule as central to their lives. Yet, while it is extraordinarily important and widespread, the golden rule is often dismissed by scholars as a vague proverb (...) that quickly leads to absurdities when one attempts to formulate it in clear terms. In this book, Harry J. Gensler defends the golden rule and addresses all of the major philosophic objections, pointing out several common misunderstanding and misapplications. Gensler first discusses golden-rule reasoning and how to avoid the main pitfalls. He then relates the golden rule to world religions and history, and to areas like moral education, egoism, evolution, society, racism, business, and medicine. The book ends with a discussion of theoretical issues . Ethics and the Golden Rule offers two introductory chapters, the first is simpler and the second more technical; a reader may start with either or both. One can then read any combination of further chapters, in any order, depending on one’s interests; but Chapters 13 and 14 are technical and assume one has read Chapter 2. This is "a golden-rule book for everyone," accessible to a wide readership. (shrink)

One side of this paper is devoted to showing that the Golden Rule, understood as standing for universal love, is centrally characteristic of Confucianism properly understood, rather than graded, familial love. In this respect Confucianism and Christianity are similar. The other side of this paper is devoted to arguing contra 18 centuries of commentators that the negative sentential formulation of the Golden Rule as found in Confucius cannot be converted to an affirmative sentential formulation (as is (...) found in Christianity) without a change in its meaning. In this respect Confucianism and Christianity are different. (shrink)

A thorough analysis of the Golden Rule (GR) is given including formal investigations of its logical structure and essential implications. Starting with the general distinction of positive and negative forms of GR a set of sixteen formal implications, one for each variant of the rule, is presented. The moral acceptability of the output of the different versions of GR is assessed in various problem contexts and in discussing several objections to GR with the conclusion that GR is (...) hopelessly inadequate as a general criterion of moral choice. (shrink)

Wattles offers a comprehensive survey of the history of the golden rule, "Do unto others as you want others to do unto you". He traces the rule's history in contexts as diverse as the writings of Confucius and the Greek philosophers, the Bible, modern theology and philosophy, and the American "self-help" context. He concludes by offering his own synthesis of these varied understandings.

This philosophical game changer looks critically at the Golden Rule in the context of game theory to see where it works and where it doesn’t, when it is applicable and when it isn’t. It shows you why knowing the difference can offer you a powerful way to transform your life from one driven by fear to one driven by love.

Should you always do unto others as you would have them do unto you? Brad Hooker investigates a seemingly plausible-looking moral principle: the Golden Rule.

RESUMEN La regla de oro es una de las máximas morales más conocidas a nivel mundial, tanto en su versión negativa -no hagas a los otros lo que no te gustaría que te hicieran a ti-, como positiva -trata a los demás como te gustaría que te trataran a ti-. Aunque pueda entenderse fundamentalmente como una regla de empatía, también tiene un claro aire de familia con otras reglas de equidad y coherencia moral que impulsan una prueba de inversión de (...) roles. El artículo repasa la rica historia transcultural de esta regla, analiza las diferentes interpretaciones posibles y profundiza en las dificultades de aplicación. ABSTRACT The golden rule is one of the best-known moral maxims worldwide, both in its negative version -Don't do to others what you wouldn't like to be done to you-, as well as positive -Treat others as you would like to be treated-. Although it can be understood primarily as a rule of empathy, it also has a clear family resemblance with other rules of fairness and moral coherence that drive a role reversal test. The article reviews its rich cross-cultural history, analyzes the different interpretations and investigates the difficulties of implementation. (shrink)

This essay addresses recent claims about the compatibility of the sociobiological theory of reciprocal altruism with standard Western formulations of the Golden Rule. Derek Parfit claims that the theory of reciprocal altruism teaches us to be “reciprocal altruists,” who benefit only those people from whom we can reasonably expect benefits in the future. The Golden Rule, on the other hand, teaches us to benefit anyone regardless of their intention or ability to return the favor, or as (...) Parfit puts it, the Golden Rule teaches us to be “suckers.” I argue that this distinction is founded on a misconception of the nature of the theory of reciprocal altruism, which is sociobiological as opposed to moral, and that this distinction accordingly confuses is with ought. Sociobiological theories may explain underlying psychological motivations in individuals (and perhaps even in populations), but these theories do not prescribe any sort of moral behavior. Furthermore, the theory of reciprocal altruism does not imply mental states of which agents are aware. The unconscious motivations assumed by this theory are in fact compatible with certain formulations of the Golden Rule; I will accordingly argue for the view that certain words with moral content related to the Golden Rule—such as “altruism” and “selfishness”—exist only insofar as they are social tools, which can further the self-interests of an individual in any group. (shrink)

Darwin claimed that human and animal minds differ in degree but not in kind, and that ethical principles such as the Golden Rule are just an extension of thinking found in animals. Both claims are false. The best way to distinguish differences in degree from differences in kind is by identifying mechanisms that have emergent properties. Recursive thinking is an emergent capability found in humans but not in other animals. The Golden Rule and some other ethical (...) principles such as Kant’s categorical imperative require recursion, so they constitute ethical thinking that is restricted to humans. Changes in kind have tipping points resulting from mechanisms with emergent properties. (shrink)

This research attempts to throw light on and show the fundamental similarities and differences between the African and Western ethical conceptions by examining the foundation of ethics and morality in the two systems, using the Golden rule principle in African ethics and Kant’s categorical imperative in Western ethics as tools of comparative analysis. The African indigenous ethics revolves round the “Golden Rule Principle” as the ultimate moral principle. This principle states that “Do unto others what you (...) want them to do unto you”. This principle compares favourably with Immanuel Kant’s whose main thrust is found in his “Categorical Imperative”, with the injunction for us to “Act only on that maxim through which you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.” The categorical imperative becomes for Kant, the principle of universalizability, which according to Kant, is categorical and must be equally binding on everyone. This idea of Kant, we argue, compares with the “Golden Rule Principle”. Both are rationalistic and social but the limitations of Kant which we hope to point out, make it quite insufficient as the foundation of morality. The Africans’ which is more humanistic describes morality and is better served. The main difference between the two ethical systems lies in the fact that whereas the “golden rule” starts from the self and considers the consequences on the first before others, the universalizability principle on the other hand considers the consequences on others first before self. (shrink)

The Hastings Center's chief advancement officer describes values and intellectual interests that undergird his work. “My job is itself collaborative in spirit,” Sauder writes. “My primary responsibility is to identify and build connections with a wide variety of people who value ethical decision‐making at the crossroads of health, science, and technology.”.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relationships between the so-called golden rule and the so-called platinum rule. According to the golden rule (GR) you ought to treat others as you want to be treated by them; and according to the platinum rule (PR), you ought to treat others as they want to be treated by you. In this essay I argue for the following propositions. (1) (GR) and (PR) are logically independent. (...) (2) (PR) can be derived from (GR) given that you want to be treated by others as they want to be treated by you. (3) (GR) is derivable from (PR) given that others want to be treated by you as you want to be treated by them. And (4) (GR) and (PR) are equivalent given that you want to be treated by others as they want to be treated by you, and others want to be treated by you as you want to be treated by them. I consider some possible interpretations of (GR) and (PR), and I also address the question of whether (GR) is more plausible than (PR) or vice versa, or whether they are complementary. I discuss one argument for the view that (PR) is better than (GR) and mention several arguments for the view that (GR) is better than (PR). The discussion suggests that (GR) and (PR) are complementary. (shrink)

This chapter reviews the relevant anthropology, starting with the apparent universality of the golden rule — do as you would be done by — in hunter-gatherer societies. It points out that all pure foraging societies have two properties: they do not tolerate bosses, and they share very fairly. A putative explanation of the first property is offered that appeals to the game theory discipline of mechanism design. The second property is explained as an evolutionary consequence of the implicit (...) insurance contracts that are common in animals as ahedge against hunger and starvation. If so, then we have an argument in support of the contention that Rawls' original position captures the deep structure of fairness norms wired into our brains. The analogy with Chomsky's deep structure of language is close. (shrink)

The “social-political-hierarchical” qualifications have long been identified as the essential features of the Confucian golden rule. This essay challenges this prevailing characterization by revealing the relation and differences between Confucius’ original shu 恕 and a series of post-Confucius reformulations in ancient Confucianism. Specifically, the premise of equality, which underlies Confucius’ formulation of shu in correlation with ren 仁, rendered shu incompatible with asymmetrical relationships. Besides the advantage of overcoming this limitation by adapting the golden rule structure (...) of shu to specified asymmetrical relationships, the post-Confucius formula, especially “the measuring square” in the Great Learning, was devised to guide one to infer universalizable rules of conduct for various roles in diverse relationships. On this basis, I demonstrate a pivotal shift in the golden rule practice of ancient Confucianism—a shift of focus from its correlation with ren to its conformity with li 禮 as the system of rules of conduct and the principle of “discriminations.”. (shrink)

We know the Golden Rule of morality from various formulations in the most ancient of literary sources. Having a certain philosophical–theoretical and normative-ethical concept of the Golden Rule, w...

First published in 1865, this book puts forth a new ethical system that aims to provide practical guidance on how to live a good life based on reason, empathy, and social responsibility. The author argues that traditional religious and philosophical systems have failed to keep up with the changing social and economic conditions of modern life and proposes a set of principles that are grounded in the needs and aspirations of ordinary people. The book covers a wide range of topics, (...) including work, family, education, politics, and the environment. A thought-provoking read for anyone interested in ethics and social justice. This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work is in the "public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant. (shrink)

The world is too complex and sloppy for such uncompromising attitudes. This chapter discusses the messier "hypothetical imperatives" that invoke desire, negotiation, and reciprocity Of these "lesser," but altogether wiser and deeper principles, one has stood out for its independent derivation, with different words but to the same effect, in culture after culture. Christians call this principle the "golden rule"; Plato, Daniel Hillel, and Confucius knew the same maxim by other names. Patience of this magnitude usually involves a (...) deep understanding of a fundamental principle, central to profession of geology but all too rarely grasped in daily life—the effects of scale. Phenomena unfold on their own appropriate scales of space and time and may be invisible in our myopic world of dimensions assessed by comparison with human height and times metered by human lifespans. On geological scales, our planet will take good care of itself and let time clear the impact of any human malfeasance. (shrink)

Talion and the Golden Rule are usually considered expressions of successive historical stages in the development of morality. The conventional wisdom is that talion-lex talionis-is a form of social control corresponding to a fairly early stage of the development of human communities. From a purely historical point of view, talion is a rule of punishment for crime according to which the retribution should strictly correspond to the harm inflicted. The rule goes back to the archaic custom (...) of blood vengeance which it supplanted. In contemporary normative research, talion is frequently interpreted more broadly as a rule of equal recompense. This is historically incorrect, but in theoretical analysis it is permissible as a general idea of a special type of control of human interrelations. It is precisely in this context that we understand the accepted opinion that as social relations develop and become richer talion is pushed to the periphery of human relations by another, more refined normative form, the Golden Rule, the appearance of which marks the emergence of morality in the contemporary sense of the word. Thus, talion is seen as a premoral form of social control, although if it is taken in the indicated strict sense then, historically, it antecedes not so much morality as institutionalized law. (shrink)

In William Angoff's recent article in Theoretical and Philosophical Psychology, he presented several thought-provoking philosophical issues of concern to measurement-oriented psychologists. The first of these issues, the notion of test and item bias, is the topic of the present paper. In his article, he reports that average score differences in the performance on many cognitive tests have appeared among racial or ethnic groups. Twenty to thirty years ago, differential psychologists, summarizing and critically evaluating studies demonstrating performance differences on tests and (...) in other behavior among cultural, ethnic and racial groups, agreed that such group differences indeed existed, but that causal interpretations differed markedly among the investigators at the time. More recently, the focus has shifted to what has been termed test fairness, with the focus falling more upon tests and their inadequacies than the behavior which underlies the tests. Similar findings and conclusions were frequently advanced in physiological tests of strength and endurance which are often used for civil service positions such as those in the fire fighting service and which frequently disadvantage women. The question raised is simply whether the discrimination is fair or not; that is, do given test score differences reflect variation in performance between groups which are reflective of true behavioral differences or are these differences artifactual and embedded in the assessment device itself, whether intentional or not. 2012 APA, all rights reserved). (shrink)