Golden rule

[Unveiled Artist]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Who are we actually calling idiots?

 

[columbus]

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Is this one of those threads with a vague question based on a personal backstory not mentioned in the OP?
Tom

 

[McBell]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Who are we actually calling idiots?

Which "scriptures" are you referring to?
I mean, there are several versions of the golden rule.

 

[Mock Turtle]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Who are we actually calling idiots?

Do you associate the Golden Rule with religious belief - as coming from such? Seems to me as likely coming from evolved morality since it is so widespread, and more based in reciprocity than anything else. And not sure where you intended this thread to go.

 

[beenherebeforeagain]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Who are we actually calling idiots?

just because a general moral rule such as the so-called Golden Rule exist in scripture doesn't mean that anyone who uses it is necessarily borrowing it from that or any scripture. In the case of the rule, it is a sound rule-based ethical principle to guide actions; Kant completely de and re constructed it as the categorical imperative, totally without dependence on scriptural version.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Is this one of those threads with a vague question based on a personal backstory not mentioned in the OP?
Tom

No.

 

[viole]

do into others as one as you want others to do for you

Except when you are a masochist...

Ciao

- viole

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Do you associate the Golden Rule with religious belief - as coming from such? Seems to me as likely coming from evolved morality since it is so widespread, and more based in reciprocity than anything else. And not sure where you intended this thread to go.

If reciprocity wasn't balanced, would it still be under the golden rule?

No big cosmic intention behind the thread. I never got the golden rule cause there are so many clauses and bias that how we want to be treated is not necessarily how others want to be treated.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

just because a general moral rule such as the so-called Golden Rule exist in scripture doesn't mean that anyone who uses it is necessarily borrowing it from that or any scripture. In the case of the rule, it is a sound rule-based ethical principle to guide actions; Kant completely de and re constructed it as the categorical imperative, totally without dependence on scriptural version.

Are we actually treating others as we want to be treated?

 

[Mock Turtle]

If reciprocity wasn't balanced, would it still be under the golden rule?

No big cosmic intention behind the thread. I never got the golden rule cause there are so many clauses and bias that how we want to be treated is not necessarily how others want to be.

Well I think a bit of balancing wouldn't be harmful, as in not expecting reciprocity to be always equal in nature. And I think the nature of the rule would allow for differences, in that we aren't all expected to be the same and have the same wants or needs, but it seems to be a fair basis for a top level rule - with a bit of Kant thrown in.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

I have absolutely no clue what your second sentence has to do with your first.

Who are we actually calling idiots?

You are the one that mentioned "idiots."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

I have absolutely no clue what your second sentence has to do with your first.


You are the one that mentioned "idiots."

Why do you always need to be negative or sarcastic?

It's a habit of yours and doesn't work well. Asking for clarification works better in discussions.

If you called someone else an idiot, what does that say about you?

If you do unto others (call them an idiot), would that be something you want people to do to you?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Which "scriptures" are you referring to?
I mean, there are several versions of the golden rule.

That's just the context of the question. Where the phrase ideally comes from. The point isn't religious views. I've heard non religious say they like or keep the golden rule.

Are we (people I'm referring to) actually treating others as we want to be treated?

 

[PureX]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Who are we actually calling idiots?

People very often ignore the 'golden rule'. And many of them are religious.

 

[icehorse]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Who are we actually calling idiots?

I think an honest, clean debate can be consistent with the Golden Rule. But personal attacks like the ones you're mentioning are not a part of good debates.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

People very often ignore the 'golden rule'. And many of them are religious.

Do you think the golden rule can be followed, religious and not?

 

[PureX]

Do you think the golden rule can be followed, religious and not?

Sure. Most people treat other people as they hope to be treated in return. The problem is that we don't all hope to be treated in the same manner. Some of us want to be treated far better than others do, or better in certain ways. And so treat other people accordingly. And then are surprised and frustrated when they are not treated that way in return.

The 'golden rule' is a moral generalization that can't necessarily be applied in every instance, or to a full degree.

 

[Altfish]

I've heard those not religious still hold some things in scripture though without god context: do into others as one as you want others to do for you.

Are we treating ourselves as idiots, stupid etc when we accuse others as being so?

Who are we actually calling idiots?

The Golden Rule preceded any scriptures.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The Golden Rule preceded any scriptures.

People say they do then call other people names. So maybe their in contradiction with their values or they don't realize if they hurt others that's how you want to be treated too.

Religion gives it context. By itself it's hard to see it with human bias

 

[MNoBody]

the golden rule
or the rule of gold...you decide....we all do, all the time, we all end up serving one or the other in a duality, it is...inevitable.