Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
07-23-2003, 10:32 PM | #1 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Ventura, CA
Posts: 1,870
|
The Golden Rule
Hindu - This is the sum of duty; do naught unto others which if done to thee would cause thee pain.
Zoroastrian - That nature alone is good which refrains from doing unto another whatsoever is not good for itself. Taoist - Regard your neighbour's gain as your own gain, and your neighbour's loss as your own loss. Buddhist - Hurt not others in ways that you would find hurtful. Confucian - Do not unto others what you would not have them do unto you. Jain - In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, we should regard all creatures as we regard our own self. Jewish - Whatever thou hatest thyself, that do not to another. Christian - All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them. Islamic - No one of you is a believer until he desires for his brother that which he desires for himself. Sikh - As thou deemest thyself, so deem others. |
07-23-2003, 10:42 PM | #2 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 179
|
I can't stand the way some Christians think the Golden Rule is some brilliant philosophical concept, unheard of before Christianity and impossible for humans to conceive of on their own. How ridiculous.
|
07-24-2003, 12:13 AM | #3 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Champaign, IL or Boston, MA
Posts: 6,360
|
The Golden Rule is nice and all, but I think the only philosophies that actually eombody it are the eastern ones, such as Taoism, Buddhism and Hinduism... many of the other ones just have it there as a general guideline, but have nothing other than heaven or hell to justify it.
|
07-24-2003, 04:54 AM | #4 | |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 7,834
|
Quote:
But it's true that none of the big three really do! Lane |
|
07-24-2003, 06:06 AM | #5 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Denver
Posts: 1,774
|
Quote:
|
|
07-24-2003, 06:43 AM | #6 | |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: U.S.
Posts: 4,171
|
Re: The Golden Rule
Quote:
DC |
|
07-24-2003, 07:11 AM | #7 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 920B Milo Circle
Lafayette, CO
Posts: 3,515
|
Quote:
I am unfamiliar with Galvin, and could not find a clear reference in a Google search, and feel no need to consider the views of such an obscure individual. Bentam's moral theory includes "Each to count for one, and none to count for more than one." |
|
07-24-2003, 07:29 AM | #8 | |
Contributor
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
|
Quote:
And I seem to remember quite a bit about altruism in Dawkins' work. Further, many outside of religions teach or recommend variations of the Golden Rule. One that comes to mind is Joseph Campbell. So your selection of four examples isn't exactly representative of all non-religious literature, is it? Heck, I and others "teach" the Golden Rule (or a modification thereof) here on this board. Further, I don't recall that non-religious ethics is based upon any one or a combination of the writings of the four you listed. Incidentally, the Golden Rule is a cornerstone of Humanitarianism. |
|
07-24-2003, 08:53 AM | #9 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: 920B Milo Circle
Lafayette, CO
Posts: 3,515
|
Quote:
|
|
07-24-2003, 08:59 AM | #10 |
Contributor
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas
Posts: 29,689
|
I agree totally, Alonzo. That's why I said his work is not intended as an ethical guide. Didn't mean to indicate otherwise.
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|