The old golden rule was fine, the only issue is a semantic one. This "new"
rule loses its bang because it ignores the relationship between you and your
fellow man. Arguably, this "projective" capacity is the foundation of the
rule to begin with. The idea, as expressed by modern cog sci scholars, goes
something like this: We developed the ability to hold a model of the world
around us in our heads to make decisions, and as a byproduct of this
"projective" ability, we learned to project, or model, our own experience of
humanity to other humans...i.e. creating a model of what its like to be us
and projecting it on them.
Forget multiculturalism, thats just a small example of the differences that
arise between our subjective, lonely, isolated minds. Even people
Do unto others _just as_ you would have them do unto you. The statement is
intended more to express the ideal relationship between individuals than to
dictate specific behaviors. It can be processed on many levels. i.e. "I
will give you, Mr. Pacifist, a punch in the face because I would have you
punch me, Mr. Masochist, in the face." but by that same token, "I will not
do to you, Mr. Pacifist, what you do not want me, Mr. Masochist, to do to
you, because I would not do to you, what I would not want you to do to me."
The golden rule should be seen to operate on this second, "higher level"...
Maybe somebody out there could better express what I'm trying to get
Sean
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-extropians@extropy.com
> [mailto:owner-extropians@extropy.com]On Behalf Of Scott Badger
> Sent: Wednesday, January 13, 1999 6:15 PM
> To: extropians@extropy.com
> Subject: Re: The "New Golden Rule"
>
>
>
> Mark D. Fulwiler <mfulwiler@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>
> >Scott Badger wrote:
> >
> >> Multiculturalism has made us aware that
> >>the old Golden Rule no longer applies. The new Golden
> >>Rule is:
> >
> >
> >>"Do unto others as they would have you do unto them."
> >
> >What if someone asks you to kill them? Or what if they would have you
> >give them all your money? Clearly this "New Golden Rule"
> still has some
> >major problems. :-)
> >
> >Mark Fulwiler
> >
>
> Agreed. Do you have an improved version that overcomes
> the problem of conflicting values in cross-cultural exchanges?
>
> I am not personally inclined to offer my respect to any culture's
> mores simply because "that's their way". Many cultures have
> "ways" of hurting and denigrating their members (especially the
> women, but males too). But we've already discussed this issue
> fairly recently, so I'll stop here.
>
> Scott
>
>