3 ms·
That rule breaks down if it isn't qualified. What if the way they want to be treated isn't good for them? Especially in the case of immature people (and espec
by PakG1 15y ago
That rule breaks down if it isn't qualified. What if the way they want to be treated isn't good for them? Especially in the case of immature people (and especially immature children). A simple example: always giving a kid a ton of candy whenever they want is hardly treating them well.
How we should treat others is rarely an easy-to-discern topic. Lot of room for error there. We could say, "oh, but it's assuming they know what they're doing; or, oh, it's assuming they're a normal functioning person; etc". But the fact is, in life, a lot of people don't know what they're doing. They struggle with their relationships, their finances, and their very purpose of life. Whether it's a high school sophomore desperate for friends or a successful, rich guy with a mid-life crisis, we all have moments of weakness where we make irrational decisions and have irrational desires.
Building on that point, further complicating matters is that people often don't know what they want, often including how they want to be treated. Oh, we know it usually means that people want respect, love, money, happiness, whatever. But what does it mean at a tactical level that actually gives us the insight for how to treat them well? Was my mom really jealous of me getting a box of cookies for a friend instead of her (long story), or did she just wish we could hang out more together before I left again for my new home? Well, turns out that although she was jealous of the cookies, she didn't care about the cookies at all. She wanted to spend time with me. Now, how is a normal person who sucks at conflict resolution supposed to pick up on that? It took me 30 minutes of talking with her.
I really think that this rule is useless, unless one is some kind of prophet who can see into people's innermost hearts. It offers little real-world tactical advice. You might argue that the Golden Rule doesn't either, but I'd say it's much easier to implement, and much more difficult to screw up. And as the other guy notes, this Platinum Rule would derive from the Golden Rule anyway.
- pbreit 15y agoThe Platinum Rule only sort of derives from the Golden Rule (at least the name does). Useless? Really? For example, I hate to be waited on. Is that how I should treat others? Does it take a rocket surgeon to figure out who likes to be waited on and who doesn't? Wow. Useless, really?
- PakG1 15y agoI'm sorry, did you just apply the Golden Rule to yourself? Confused by that, if you're pushing this Platinum Rule (which I actually had usually rather heard of described as the Silver Rule, but that's besides the point). My point isn't about how simple things are simple. It's that human interactions and relationships can be complex things, and we shouldn't take them lightly. And there have been plenty of times where I screwed up in even the simple things. If you never have, I applaud you. But I see Platinum Rule being difficult to implement with a high success rate, especially in complex scenarios, given what I've already discussed above. A better way to refute me is to explain how I overcomplicate things and why life is really as simple as you describe. But I don't think I am overcomplicating things at all.
- pbreit 15y ago> did you just apply the Golden Rule to yourself? Yes, as an example of how it commonly fails. Of course I screw up simple things (or are you just being rude?). Sure, the Platinum Rule is harder to implement but that doesn't mean it cannot be a good rule or preferred to the Golden Rule. The Silver Rule is the negative form of the Golden Rule. Your whole comment seems ill-conceived.
- PakG1 15y agoI'm just asking you to respond to my concerns about your Platinum Rule. You haven't done that yet. Where in your example you say that the Golden Rule fails, I don't think it does if you understand the heart of why we're saying the Platinum drives from the Golden. I think you're oversimplifying these rules, and that they have more overlap than you're implying. It's why I see the derivation to be so easy to digest. Email me if you'd like to continue the conversation. I do find it interesting and also important. My mind is full of this topic having finally gotten around to reading Speaker of the Dead. I love Ender. And I'm sorry if you thought I was rude.