The Golden Rule: Natural way of thinking

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
PtldPlatypus said:
So in other words, notions like the golden rule weren't conceived by man, they simply always existed prior to man "discovering" them?
Click to expand...

Assuming the golden rule is an objective moral axiom then supposedly, yeah - in the same sense 2+2 = 4 before anyone discovered that, or even before there were 4 things in the universe.
 
crowTrobot said:
Assuming the golden rule is an objective moral axiom then supposedly, yeah - in the same sense 2+2 = 4 before anyone discovered that, or even before there were 4 things in the universe.
Click to expand...

That's what really interests me about this philosophy. Like even those that kill are actually going against the grain of nature. It would be like those apposed of the "Golden Rule" saying "Hey I can tell you 2 + 2 is really 40".
 
Denny Crane said:
Obviously societal morals depend on the society and the times.

At one point, this society banned alcohol.

In Roman times, they certainly did to others what they would not want done to themselves. They thrived, too.

The Mayans played sports games and the losing team was routinely killed. I don't see any golden rule in that.

Rwanda was a case where there was no real society anymore; the one they had broke down. The result wasn't golden rule in action, but what looks to me to be Man's true nature.

It is that we reason, and that if I don't kill you/you won't kill me is a fair trade, that we generally (in the West) don't act like the Rwandans.
Click to expand...

This is why I don't agree that society is the determining factor. When society breaks, man resorts back to human nature... That would only prove that "The Golden Rule" is not natural.
 
The golden rule is not natural.

It only makes sense when you consider property rights.

I don't think I care if I insult you and you insult me back. Do unto you as you do to me. No real harm there.

But fuck with what you own (including your person)? Watch out.

So yeah, it is a societal thing. A general agreement among the people.
 
Denny Crane said:
The golden rule is not natural.

It only makes sense when you consider property rights.

I don't think I care if I insult you and you insult me back. Do unto you as you do to me. No real harm there.

But fuck with what you own (including your person)? Watch out.

So yeah, it is a societal thing. A general agreement among the people.
Click to expand...

So you are a firm believer that the society with most power can set the compass?
 
magnifier661 said:
So you are a firm believer that the society with most power can set the compass?
Click to expand...

It's really obvious. The Chinese have no problem with a one child rule and forced abortions and we are constantly pushing our concept of human rights on them and upon others.

There are modern civilizations that have slavery and women are treated as chattel, and so on. Those aren't of our (USA) compass.
 
Denny Crane said:
It's really obvious. The Chinese have no problem with a one child rule and forced abortions and we are constantly pushing our concept of human rights on them and upon others.

There are modern civilizations that have slavery and women are treated as chattel, and so on. Those aren't of our (USA) compass.
Click to expand...

The US is a "closed system". Within the system, the ones with most power dictate the people's compass? You agree with this?
 
Eastoff said:
You experience the loss yourself. That's the definition of empathy. Maybe you meant sympathy?
Click to expand...

No I meant empathy... Since the writer of that Instagram said "lack". If you lack something, how can you gain it right?
 
magnifier661 said:
No I meant empathy... Since the writer of that Instagram said "lack". If you lack something, how can you gain it right?
Click to expand...

Oooh, I see your point now. I need to stew on it.

edit: The original author meant sympathy, and is bad with words.
 
Last edited:
Eastoff said:
Oooh, I see your point now. I need to stew on it.

edit: The original author meant sympathy, and is bad with words.
Click to expand...

Okay well if it's "sympathy", then how is that learned? Society or genetic?

Then the debate continues... I mean, what guidelines determine if one is sympathetic? If it's not genetic, then it's clearly not natural. And if it's not natural, then man should be free to kill, rape or pillage to get an upper hand in society.
 
magnifier661 said:
This only questions: "Society does not determine the compass". Society set the rules in its closed system, yet many break it without remorse.
Click to expand...

It's not a closed system.

Mafia.
 
magnifier661 said:
Okay, whatever the case... You believe that this is not a genetic inheritance. That whatever society you live in will determine your morality?
Click to expand...

Yep.

Parents teach their kids, the kids teach their kids, etc. For generations. Here we are.

Look how long it's take to get this far eliminating racism. Still have a way to go, but it seems a lot better than it was in the 60s when I was growing up.
 
Denny Crane said:
Yep.

Parents teach their kids, the kids teach their kids, etc. For generations. Here we are.

Look how long it's take to get this far eliminating racism. Still have a way to go, but it seems a lot better than it was in the 60s when I was growing up.
Click to expand...

That's very interesting really. I mean think about it... The ability to instill such "learned behavior" and, for the most part, kept most of the same values for over thousands of years. It would be a "HUGE" evolutionary leap for this species.
 
magnifier661 said:
I always wonder how an Atheist believes that morality is a natural trait. I'm not discounting they have morality, but the "moral compass" seems a bit contradictory if you believe in the "natural world".

Does the sun have no problem wiping out all existence to consume its planets to stay burning?

Regardless, this is a battle in my logical thinking. I mean if your existence is only for the short time you have on this planet, then why not do whatever it takes to destroy, consume, kill or whatever to give yourself advantage in anything in life.

Why would it be wrong if one cheats to get better grades on a test? I mean we are instinctively trying to survive right?
Click to expand...

The sun has no morals.
Why not do horrible things? Because I am a secular humanist and doing horrible things hurts others. The secular humanist idea of morality is based on not doing harm to others. And others means any race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, nationality. I'd take it further; as a secular humanist I am bound to try to do things to help others. Because we get one and only one chance at life. It's up to us what we do with it. There is no god I can ask to forgive me and send me to heaven even if I do shitty things to others.

Because I am like all of us a fallible human I still sometimes do shitty things. We all do. It's up to me to make what corrections I can. No god will do it for me.

There is some natural altruism; it has been shown to be biological among especially group living animals. But morality must be taught and learned. And it is hard to teach if you also tell people some god can forgive you and send you to heaven no matter how many shitty things you do as long as you have the "right" beliefs.
 
Denny Crane said:
Obviously societal morals depend on the society and the times.

At one point, this society banned alcohol.

In Roman times, they certainly did to others what they would not want done to themselves. They thrived, too.

The Mayans played sports games and the losing team was routinely killed. I don't see any golden rule in that.

Rwanda was a case where there was no real society anymore; the one they had broke down. The result wasn't golden rule in action, but what looks to me to be Man's true nature.

It is that we reason, and that if I don't kill you/you won't kill me is a fair trade, that we generally (in the West) don't act like the Rwandans.
Click to expand...

Your examples of the Rwandan's seems to support my point that morals are a byproduct of society and having to live with eachother. When there is break down people revert to their animal ways.

They Mayan example is a good one also and a great example of us imposing our modern day morals on a historical society. When I touring through the area I was told by many guides that often the winning team was the one executed, as they had achieved a great victory for their city and were now being rewarded, it was considered an honor. I did a quick search to find some supporting info on this and found that we know very little about their game and some people consider that a myth. There is also consideration that the games were used instead of wars between tribes, in which case everyone knew what they were playing for and would be considered a just and moral outcome no matter who they executed, as the few would sacrifice for the many.

In regards to your reference to the United States/West, your right we have a higher moral standard than the Rwandans. I think thats because of the comfort of our lifestyles though and the relative amount we have to loose if we acted like the Rwandians. Given a dire situation of no government and limited supplies I would guess things would get pretty scary in my neighborhood.
 
crandc said:
The sun has no morals.
Click to expand...
Ummm yeah, kinda my point... Thanks for showing that you understand... The sun is "natural" though yes?

Why not do horrible things? Because I am a secular humanist and doing horrible things hurts others. The secular humanist idea of morality is based on not doing harm to others. And others means any race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, nationality. I'd take it further; as a secular humanist I am bound to try to do things to help others. Because we get one and only one chance at life. It's up to us what we do with it. There is no god I can ask to forgive me and send me to heaven even if I do shitty things to others.

Because I am like all of us a fallible human I still sometimes do shitty things. We all do. It's up to me to make what corrections I can. No god will do it for me.

There is some natural altruism; it has been shown to be biological among especially group living animals. But morality must be taught and learned. And it is hard to teach if you also tell people some god can forgive you and send you to heaven no matter how many shitty things you do as long as you have the "right" beliefs.
Click to expand...

Interesting... I didn't assign religion or theism to this thread, and even said I would like to exclude religion from the equation, yet here you are trying to derail it and make it a religion vs. atheism thread.

How about you add to the debate, instead of trying to derail it with some Anti-Theism banter?
 
magnifier661 said:
That's very interesting really. I mean think about it... The ability to instill such "learned behavior" and, for the most part, kept most of the same values for over thousands of years. It would be a "HUGE" evolutionary leap for this species.
Click to expand...

We haven't kept the same behavior over thousands of years, though. Consider cigarette smoking. It was once a luxury for royalty, then became our huge cash crop. In 1965, ~45% of everyone smoked. Now it's under 20%. It's taken generations of teaching.
 
donkiez said:
Your examples of the Rwandan's seems to support my point that morals are a byproduct of society and having to live with eachother. When there is break down people revert to their animal ways.

They Mayan example is a good one also and a great example of us imposing our modern day morals on a historical society. When I touring through the area I was told by many guides that often the winning team was the one executed, as they had achieved a great victory for their city and were now being rewarded, it was considered an honor. I did a quick search to find some supporting info on this and found that we know very little about their game and some people consider that a myth. There is also consideration that the games were used instead of wars between tribes, in which case everyone knew what they were playing for and would be considered a just and moral outcome no matter who they executed, as the few would sacrifice for the many.

In regards to your reference to the United States/West, your right we have a higher moral standard than the Rwandans. I think thats because of the comfort of our lifestyles though and the relative amount we have to loose if we acted like the Rwandians. Given a dire situation of no government and limited supplies I would guess things would get pretty scary in my neighborhood.
Click to expand...

I think we're pretty much in agreement.

All we need now is for barfo to come along and argue the wrong side :)
 
Denny Crane said:
We haven't kept the same behavior over thousands of years, though. Consider cigarette smoking. It was once a luxury for royalty, then became our huge cash crop. In 1965, ~45% of everyone smoked. Now it's under 20%. It's taken generations of teaching.
Click to expand...

I think my point didn't come across right then. I think I'm talking conscious programming.. Like you mentioned with the cigarette smoking. In nature, to smoke or not smoke, really isn't important, yet we as a civilization made it important. And then decided to try and make it less important after understanding how it can reduce our health.
 
magnifier661 said:
I think my point didn't come across right then. I think I'm talking conscious programming.. Like you mentioned with the cigarette smoking. In nature, to smoke or not smoke, really isn't important, yet we as a civilization made it important. And then decided to try and make it less important after understanding how it can reduce our health.
Click to expand...

My thinking is that the first tool Man ever used was to hit someone else over the head with it to take something they wanted. That is man's nature. No matter what culture, there has been violence and war. Among the Indians and the American Indians and the Russians and the Europeans and the Africans and Egyptians. It didn't matter if the cultures were isolated from one another by great distances or not.

That we can reason, we realize that we live longer and better if we don't kill one another and steal from one another. We've instituted governments and their proxies (Church in long past days) to keep the peace. The peace was mostly kept, not entirely. Crusades. Duels. Mafia. Whatever.

The golden rule simply does not apply to all, but many agree it's a good idea.
 
Denny Crane said:
My thinking is that the first tool Man ever used was to hit someone else over the head with it to take something they wanted. That is man's nature. No matter what culture, there has been violence and war. Among the Indians and the American Indians and the Russians and the Europeans and the Africans and Egyptians. It didn't matter if the cultures were isolated from one another by great distances or not.

That we can reason, we realize that we live longer and better if we don't kill one another and steal from one another. We've instituted governments and their proxies (Church in long past days) to keep the peace. The peace was mostly kept, not entirely. Crusades. Duels. Mafia. Whatever.

The golden rule simply does not apply to all, but many agree it's a good idea.
Click to expand...

This makes sense
 
Denny Crane said:
Rwanda was a case where there was no real society anymore; the one they had broke down. The result wasn't golden rule in action, but what looks to me to be Man's true nature.
Click to expand...

The Golden Rule is Man's true nature.

It is practiced by us all dozens, maybe hundreds of times each day, without us even consciously thinking about it.
 
MARIS61 said:
The Golden Rule is Man's true nature.

It is practiced by us all dozens, maybe hundreds of times each day, without us even consciously thinking about it.
Click to expand...

Riiiiight. Like they practiced it hundreds of times each day in Rwanda.

It's not "true nature" but something we've been taught for generations upon generations.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
Back
Top