29 Jan '16 01:13>
Whether you treat others well or badly,
I only wish you upon yourself.
I only wish you upon yourself.
Originally posted by vistesdThing is I dont always want people to treat me exactly the way i treat them.
Whether you treat others well or badly,
I only wish you upon yourself.
Originally posted by vistesdThat might work as an encouragement or rebuke to someone else for their behaviour, but explain how it would govern your own beahviour. Perhaps I am missing some aspect of what you are getting at here.
Whether you treat others well or badly,
I only wish you upon yourself.
Originally posted by FMFIt’s simple, really: Would I wish me upon myself (based on how I actually treat others)? Why or why not, to what degree? And can that thought inform my future behavior?
That might work as an encouragement or rebuke to someone else for their behaviour, but explain how it would govern your own beahviour. Perhaps I am missing some aspect of what you are getting at here.
Originally posted by karoly aczelHi, Karoly. Long time. Hope you;'re well.
Thing is I dont always want people to treat me exactly the way i treat them.
It's just more of a declaration of non violence and basic human freedoms
edit: your "Golden Rule" has a ring of truth and has given me some food for thought. thanks
Originally posted by FMFIn the sense that the versions you cite merely offer a kind of general instruction. With a reminder that I (intentionally) put a question mark on the thread title, what I am saying is (and I am trying different revisions, in hopes of further clarity)—
Are you suggesting that your "Kind of Golden Rule" is different in any significant way from 'Do to others what you'd have them do to you' i.e "The Golden Rule"?
Originally posted by wolfgang59Perhaps this makes both my point and FMF's. What I've suggested is not really a version of the golden rule--more a kind of "karmic test". Like a Zen koan, one can spend a lot of time examining what all it might be about, rather than letting it point directly (especially if that is uncomfortable). Thanks.
I prefer the Golden Rule.
I wouldn't wish myself on anyone!!!
Originally posted by twhiteheadAnother reason why I now think the answer to the question in the thread title is "No."
I generally dislike putting morality into rules. Much better to simply be empathetic. Rules are most often used as excuses not to do something empathetic and much more rarely as direction to actually do something empathetic.
Rules are most frequently used for admonishing others rather than a guide for oneself.
When used for oneself they tend to be of the form: you only need to do this much and you won't feel guilty any more.
Originally posted by vistesdAfter reading through this thread I think you're right. The thing with the golden rule (biblically speaking) is, is that it is in the affirmative tense, i.e., to "do" unto others what one would have done unto themselves as apposed to not "doing". It assumes that one would do well unto others.
Another reason why I now think the answer to the question in the thread title is "No."
Originally posted by josephwI don't think that the "Do unto others..." formulation rules out inaction, since a valid answer to the question "What are you going to do?" in this kind of context might be "Leave them alone.". Interestingly it allows for negative feelings since "Never speak to again." is unfriendly, but if one is happy with the other never speaking to one again then it fits the formulation.
After reading through this thread I think you're right. The thing with the golden rule (biblically speaking) is, is that it is in the affirmative tense, i.e., to "do" unto others what one would have done unto themselves as apposed to not "doing". It assumes that one would do well unto others.
"Whether you treat others well or badly, I only wish you upon y ...[text shortened]... ad way to put forth the idea of treating others well for one's own sake.
How are you vistesd?