So when I was in school from 2nd to 6th grade in that school there was a sign saying to treat others the way you want to be treated. And yeah the irony with that was teachers at that school were actually quite abusive that I saw no sense in on one hand treating others the way you want to be treated meanwhile being treated badly by teachers. It might sound weird but yeah I was treated slightly better when I finally got out of that school. But yeah to me it’s kind of like how I even understand that logic is if someone treats me badly I should have a right to treat them badly. That’s basically one flaw I saw with the golden rule. If I’m treated badly what gives them the right to be treated any better? This whole golden rule idea is pretty messed up when you really consider it. If you wrong me do I have the right to wrong you? That’s really the one thing I questioned about the golden rule.

  • oxjox@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    The rule you’ve described is ‘you have the right to treat people how others have treated you’.

    That is not the Golden Rule. The point of the Golden Rule is to proactively be a good person, not one who reciprocates. Regardless of how others treat you, by treating others how you want to be treated, you will be seen as a good and decent person who spreads kindness in the world. Someone whom others won’t go online and complain about. Someone who is less likely to make someone’s day a little more shitty.

    The Golden Rule is awesome. I struggle daily to abide by it.

  • dev_null@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    ·
    5 months ago

    No, it doesn’t say you can treat someone badly if they treat you badly. It doesn’t say anything about how others treat you having any effect on how you treat them.

    It says you should treat everyone the way you’d like them to treat you, regardless if they actually do or not.

    • d00phy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      This is what I came here for. Like you said, the rule is about how you treat others, and intentionally doesn’t account for how others treat you. As was already said, lots of religions have similar rules. They also have parallels to “lead by example,” “turn the other cheek,” “vengeance is mine, sayeth the Lord,” “judge not lest ye be judged.” All of these are guidelines for community cooperation and fellowship. There will always be people who go against them, but if the overall community adheres to them it’s generally in a better position to be stable and succeed.

  • Mechanismatic@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    5 months ago

    The problem with the golden rule is that different people want to be treated differently, so they may treat you how they want to be treated but not how you want to be treated, and vice versa.

    Maybe when you’re struggling with an issue, you want to be left alone to figure it out by yourself, but your friend in the same scenario would want someone to start doing anything to help out and insisting on troubleshooting the issue together. So your friend ends up frustrating you by offering to help too much when you just want to be left alone and then when they’re struggling, they get upset that you leave them alone to deal with it.

    So communication is important. Ask people how they’d like to be treated rather than just assuming they’d want to be treated the way you want to be treated and be honest with them about how you’d like to be treated.

    • Stovetop@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      I think you’ve got the right idea, but may be overthinking it just a tad.

      The golden rule is just a proactive step when meeting and dealing with new people. Since you can’t know how others want to be treated from your first interaction, you fall back on the golden rule. So you offer to help someone, they tell you they’d prefer to be left alone, all good. Now you know.

      Basically, it’s not just “If I were in this situation, I would want to be helped, so I’m going to keep offering to help.” It’s “If I were in this situation, I would want people to be understanding and gentle, so I’ll listen to what they have to say and, if they ask for help, do whatever they need.”

      Where people get caught in the weeds though is often the difference between being “good” and being “nice”, so you’ll never have an objective answer to the best course of action. Just this general guideline to hopefully steer you in the right direction until you can figure the rest out on your own.

  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    edit-2
    5 months ago

    There are a ton of different variations of the golden rule that mostly have slightly different implications. Pretty much every religion has some flavour of it, and there’s a good reason for that.

    Cooperation has for a long time been a necessary part of human life if one wishes to accomplish much of anything, and the golden rule has long been a building block of cooperation. Of course, it’s not particularly scientific and it’s precise implementations, as you’ve noticed, are either vague or not fully correct.

    Enter game theory. The prisoner’s dilemma problem is a model cooperative game that explores various behaviour patterns between two parties. As it turns out, some of the best strategies to maximize personal gain given other opponents with unknown strategies are called: “forgiving tit-for-tat” strategies.

    Basically, cooperate until you’re betrayed, punish betrayal, but then return to cooperation. I think if you squint a bit, you can kinda see how there’s similarity to the golden rule.

    Veritasium has a pretty informative video on the subject: https://youtube.com/watch?v=mScpHTIi-kM

    In short, yeah, it’s pretty good.

  • Call me Lenny/Leni@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    “Treat others how you wish to be treated” is supposed to be acknowledged according to a diplomatic context as opposed to a domestic one. Of course, if you’re handling a certain conflict a certain way and someone says the quote as a critique of you defending yourself or you applying the “if you can’t beat them join them” rule in that conflict, it is most likely nothing more than them using it as an excuse to shift the burden. Protocol doesn’t even work like that, so such a person invokes the idea their authority is challengeable when they do that. This is not what the prophets had in mind though when they said it, their context was one of escalating culture shocks where people sheltered themselves to one perspective, which didn’t translate well into there being a basis for peace.

  • Norodix@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Sure, its very effective. Someone commits a crime, everyone gets turned into gold statues. Seems fair.