Why has the golden rule failed?

Shawn

The golden rule is perhaps the most well-known maxim that has emerged from the philosophy of ethics. It exists in many forms throughout various cultures. However, in many regards, the golden rule has been brushed aside or not taken into serious consideration in courts of law and such. An example would be the death penalty, which is not reconcilable in any way with the golden rule. In fact, most punitive measures at delivering justice are at odds with the golden rule.

Now, why is this so? Couldn't we do better than obeying the 'eye for an eye' maxim? After all, "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind." according to Gandhi who supposedly said it. The there's Martin Luther King who said, "The old law of an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind," "It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding; it seeks to annihilate rather than to convert."

Perhaps, the main reason is that to apply the golden rule, the person has to be already in some sense 'enlightened' or capable of self-love. After all, self-love is prior to treating another with kindness and empathy. Without self-love, then practicing good behavior or right conduct according to the golden rule is much harder to do. One is left with emulating the golden rule without self-love, a harder task to do in my mind.

Thoughts?

Noble Dust

↪Posty McPostface

Isn't this a bit like your last thread? :)

Perhaps, the main reason is that to apply the golden rule, the person has to be already in some sense 'enlightened' or capable of self-love. After all, self-love is prior to treating another with kindness and empathy. Without self-love, then practicing good behavior or right conduct according to the golden rule is much harder to do. One is left with emulating the golden rule without self-love, a harder task to do in my mind. — Posty McPostface

As I mentioned in the other thread, I think that's pretty much it. The golden rule begins with "the other" ("love your neighbor"), because the emphasis of the rule is "the other"; the emphasis is to love the other. But the foundation of the rule is self-love. Why the rule doesn't begin with self-love, I don't know. Maybe we in the 21st century West have lost something, have lost an intrinsic self-love that was apparent and not worth focusing on during Jesus' time, or whatever other religion. Actually, it does seem to me that if we need to "learn" self-love, then that must be a symptom of self-consciousness, and I think there might be arguments to be made that our level of self-consciousness is higher, and more neurotic than it was in the past. Just some thoughts.

Shawn

Isn't this a bit like your last thread? — Noble Dust

Yeah, just the logical follow-up.

The quite depressing view though. In part inspired by Harry Frankfurt's, The Reasons of Love.

Marchesk

The golden rule is just one maxim. I might endeavor to treat my neighbor as myself, but when he kills another neighbor, I want justice to be served.

Notice that I said another neighbor, not myself. This other neighbor could be somebody I never even talk to, and I still want my murderous neighbor arrested and tried, and if found guilty, sent away.

Noble Dust

I might endeavor to treat my neighbor as myself, but when he kills another neighbor, I want justice to be served. — Marchesk

So meaning that if you committed murder, you would want justice served to yourself, right?

Marchesk

So meaning that if you committed murder, you would want justice served to yourself, right? — Noble Dust

Hopefully, if I have any decency. But I'm also prone to being self-interested, like everyone else. That's why I won't get to try myself or pass my own sentence.

Same deal if a loved one committed murder. I might want to see them get off or serve a lighter sentence. But I don't get to decide. That would be biased.

What I want, when self-interest and bias is removed, is for everyone to be held accountable for such crimes. That's the kind of society I prefer to live in.

What's the superior alternative? Someone robs, rapes, commits murder, defrauds customers, steals identities and ruins credit. What should we do about such crimes?

Marchesk

↪Noble Dust

Another way to frame your Golden Rule question is to ask what would you want to happen if you're the victim? Or what would you want to happen to your neighbor who was victimized?

Jesus never went into detail about how the Golden Rule should or should not be applied in every situation. He's just recorded spouting off maxims and performing miracles.

But he never set down and wrote a treatise on how a society would be arranged around such maxims.

What if everyone let the dead bury themselves? Would that be a good maxim for society? Probably not.

BC

eye for an eye — Posty McPostface

The "eye for an eye" rule was a major step up in ethics. The non-ethical man visits unlimited devastation on those who harm his family, himself, his property. Insult my wife, you die. Injury my horse accidentally, I'll give you a whipping, etc.

The eye-for-an-eye rule limits action to proportional retribution. So, it's an advance.

The Golden Rule -- which existed before Jesus came along, of course, is a further advance. One would want maximum consideration and mercy for one's own misdeeds, so give maximum consideration and mercy to others' misdeeds.

The Golden Rule begin with the self because we can only know what guilt and punishment feel like for ourselves.

Then there is the other meaning of the Golden Rule: Them with the gold make the rules.

Marchesk

The Golden Rule begin with the self because we can only know what guilt and punishment feel like for ourselves. — Bitter Crank

Part of retributive justice is being aware that if you decide that bashing your neighbor's head in and stealing their stuff is a tempting idea, there could be serious consequences for doing so.

That won't inhibit everyone, as some people aren't wired to worry too much about consequences. But my guess is your average person is somewhat inhibited from doing bad things on occasion because they know they could go to jail.

Noble Dust

Another way to frame your Golden Rule question is to ask what would you want to happen if you're the victim? Or what would you want to happen to your neighbor who was victimized? — Marchesk

Agreed.

Jesus never went into detail about how the Golden Rule should or should not be applied in every situation. — Marchesk

Right, that's a key aspect of rabbinical teaching; asking questions was more important than providing answers.

What if everyone let the dead bury themselves? — Marchesk

You mean the walking dead, or what?

Marchesk

You mean the walking dead, or what? — Noble Dust

Luke 9:59-60:

He said to another man, "Follow me." But he replied, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father."
Jesus said to him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God."

Jesus made quite a few statements that would not be good for society as a whole.

BC

What's the superior alternative? — Marchesk

Well, one alternative is restorative justice. It's best applied for young offenders and relatively minor crimes. It involves bringing the offender and the victim together (in a structured setting) to help the offender understand what his actions meant, and then help him or her come up with a compensation of some kind -- not necessarily a fine, more likely some kind of work engagement with the victim.

Restorative justice could be applied to older offenders and more serious crimes, too, but with more state involvement and likely still involve jail and/or a fine.

Noble Dust

Luke 9:59-60: He said to another man, "Follow me." But he replied, "Lord, first let me go and bury my father."
Jesus said to him, "Let the dead bury their own dead, but you go and proclaim the kingdom of God." — Marchesk

Yes, I know the scripture. I was making a joke about your literal interpretation.

Marchesk

Restorative justice could be applied to older offenders and more serious crimes, too, but with more state involvement and likely still involve jail and/or a fine. — Bitter Crank

To a point, but I wonder what sort of restorative justice a rapist would do, since you don't want to further traumatize their victim. Or what you would have a murderer do that wouldn't be a total affront to the victim's family and friends.

BC

↪Noble Dust

↪Marchesk

Said in the same vain as what Jesus said to the rich young man who wanted to follow Him: "First, go and sell all you have." The young man went away sadly [because he couldn't give up his wealth].

"Your family business comes second to the Kingdom of God." or worse than second. It's a tough demand.

Marchesk

=

Said in the same vain as what Jesus said to the rich young man who wanted to follow Him: "First, go and sell all you have." The young man went away sadly [because he couldn't give up his wealth].

"Your family business comes second to the Kingdom of God." or worse than second. It's a tough demand. — Bitter Crank

Or cut off your hand if it causes you to sin. Of course all of that can be interpreted in a non-literal sense, but it seems to be saying everything else is secondary to your calling. I'm not sure you can build a modern society on the back of Jesus's teachings.

Noble Dust

↪Bitter Crank

(Y)

Noble Dust

↪Marchesk

You're not actually interpreting that literally, right?

BC

↪Marchesk

Obviously getting chummy with the victim might not be appropriate in rape cases. However, I think that perpetrators need to perform sacrificial acts of some kind on behalf of their victims -- something more productive than spending 10 years in a box at state expense (and it's quite a bit of expense).

Shawn

↪Marchesk

It's interesting to note how some tribes or primitive societies go about the whole ordeal. I'm on my cell and don't have the papers but it would seem that people in said primitive societies feel a much greater sense of.bond with their fellow kindsmen. I assume that would be another prerequisite for the golden rule to be maintained in practice.

Marchesk

It's interesting to note how some tribes or primitive societies go about the whole ordeal. I'm on my cell and don't have the papers but it would seem that people in said primitive societies feel a much greater sense of.bond with their fellow kindsmen. I assume that would be another prerequisite for the golden rule to be maintained in practice. — Posty McPostface

Maybe so, but there was a show on how this Amish girl ended up going to the police because her brothers were repeatedly raping her, and the Amish community's punishment had not succeeded in stopping it.

She probably couldn't go back, but you realize that sometimes those small communities don't have a good way of handling certain situations.

Or take an actual tribe (I don't recall where this was, some jungle) where if you come to believe that your relative has been possessed by an evil spirit, you're supposed to kill them.

Noble Dust

Or cut off your hand if it causes you to sin. Of course all of that can be interpreted in a non-literal sense, but it seems to be saying everything else is secondary to your calling. — Marchesk

What is "calling"?

BC

↪Marchesk

Right. Not sure that Jesus meant that literally. Though some people these days are willing to cut off your hand for you if they think it causes you to commit sins.

Sometimes Jesus speaks in very harsh terms, and I'm guessing that there was a cultural opening for that, and Jesus, of course, came from that culture. Other times he is very gentle.

BC

I suppose Jesus always knew best, but one has to wonder whether Lazarus, who was already starting to stink pretty badly, really wanted to come back to life.

Marchesk

What is "calling"? — Noble Dust

What Bitter Crank said. Jesus was talking to people who expressed an interest in being his followers, which seemed to involve leaving your old life behind and follow him around and learn from his teachings.

All this because the Kingdom of Heaven was near, whatever Jesus meant by that.

Noble Dust

↪Bitter Crank

Maybe he had a super trippy NDE? The disciples would probably be dying to hear about it.

Noble Dust

What Bitter Crank said. — Marchesk

Where?

Marchesk

suppose Jesus always knew best, but one has to wonder whether Lazarus, who was already starting to stink pretty badly, really wanted to come back to life. — Bitter Crank

Guess that depends on where he was hanging out while he was dead?

There was an X-Files episode where these idiots uncovered a genie who gave them three wishes. One idiot wished to be invisible, and then he got run over by a bus who didn't see him. So his friend/brother idiot wished for him to come back to life, and he came back as a walking corpse.

Shawn

↪Marchesk

It's troubling when there's nobody around to enforce the rules of good conduct. However, I expect banishment from the society to be in general the most severe form of punishment or putative measure of choice in said primitive or such societies.

If you can't care for me, why bother with you?

Marchesk

It's troubling when there's nobody around to enforce the rules of good conduct. However, I expect banishment from the society to be in general the most severe form of punishment in said primitive or such societies. — Posty McPostface

It sounded like the Amish punishment for rape was not very severe, to say the least. And in a society where you're allowed to kill a relative because you think they've been possessed by an evil spirit, there is no recourse.

Shawn

↪Marchesk

Yeah, there's that cultural relativism. Yet, the golden rule or the more refined version of it being Rawl's veil of ignorance still is valid given any culture and its norms.

Why has the golden rule failed?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions