What is the Best Rule for Ethical Behavior?

  • Thread starter Thread starter superpaul3000
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around various ethical rules and principles that govern behavior, including the golden rule, silver rule, platinum rule, and others. Participants explore the implications and limitations of these rules in different scenarios, particularly concerning individuals with extreme or harmful desires. The conversation touches on ethical relativism and the subjective nature of morality.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant critiques the golden rule, suggesting it could lead to harmful actions by individuals with extreme desires.
  • Another participant proposes the silver rule as an improvement but acknowledges it does not fully prevent harmful actions.
  • The platinum rule is introduced as a better alternative, though concerns are raised about the obligation to satisfy others' wants.
  • A proposed negative platinum rule aims to prevent harm by prohibiting actions that others do not want done to them.
  • Some participants introduce humorous or alternative rules, such as the mercury rule and the Brown rule, which focus on self-reflection and happiness, respectively.
  • Kant's categorical imperative is mentioned as a moral guideline, with some participants noting its similarity to the silver rule.
  • Concerns are expressed about the potential for misinterpretation of desires, particularly regarding individuals who may believe others want to be harmed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views on ethical rules, with no consensus reached. Some support the exploration of various rules, while others challenge the implications of each proposed rule. The discussion remains unresolved regarding which rule might be considered the best.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the proposed rules, particularly concerning extreme cases and the subjective nature of desires. There is an acknowledgment of the complexity in determining a universally applicable ethical rule.

superpaul3000
Messages
62
Reaction score
1
I was thinking about the golden rule today ("do to others what you would like to be done to you"). This seems like a good rule at first but it only works for certain people. Consider a crazy person who wants somebody to murder them. They are in fact obligated by the golden rule to go out and murder someone. So that makes me think we need to find a better rule from which we derive our laws.

Next I thought of the silver rule (which is the negative golden rule, "Do not do to others as you would not have them do to you"). This looks a little better. The crazy person is no longer obligated to murder others. However, they are not in violation of the silver rule if they do go murder someone.

So then I thought about the platinum rule ("do to others as they want done to them"). This rule looks a lot better. Now the crazy person is not allowed to murder people who don't want to be murdered. The only problem with this rule is that it obligates people to satisfy others wants. This seems unreasonable. What if I want to do nothing? Either I need to go against my wants to satisfy others wants or they need to sacrifice their wants so I can keep doing nothing.

I think the best rule would be the negative platinum rule (don't do to others what they don't want done to them). This rule still stops the crazy person and nobody has to fight about whose wants are more important. Is there an official metal name for this rule?

I am an ethical relativist so I don't think that there is such a thing as the right rule. Perhaps just a rule that is better at making more people happy. What do you think?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I set the rule: "If you want to do something to someone, do it to yourself first". Let's call it a mercury rule.
 
haael said:
I set the rule: "If you want to do something to someone, do it to yourself first". Let's call it a mercury rule.

lol, that would be fun to watch but you still run into the problem of crazy people hurting themselves and then others.
 
There is also the Brown rule:

"We are on Earth to make others happy"

http://www.the-happy-manager.com/happiness-charlie-brown.html

Lucy: Why do you think we're put here on Earth Charlie Brown?

Charlie Brown: To make others happy.

Lucy: I don't think I'm making anyone very happy. Of course nobody's making me very happy either. SOMEBODY'S NOT DOING HIS JOB!
 
lol, that would be fun to watch but you still run into the problem of crazy people hurting themselves and then others.
All hurting would be non-fatal, though. There's always a chance that a freak would die before he hurted anyone. And he would not be able to harm too many people, since all his actions would accumulate on himself.
 
Andre said:
There is also the Brown rule:

"We are on Earth to make others happy"

I've never heard of that one. Sounds good to me. It doesn't require us to satisfy everybody's wants.
 
superpaul3000 said:
I was thinking about the golden rule today ("do to others what you would like to be done to you"). This seems like a good rule at first but it only works for certain people. Consider a crazy person who wants somebody to murder them. They are in fact obligated by the golden rule to go out and murder someone. So that makes me think we need to find a better rule from which we derive our laws.

Next I thought of the silver rule (which is the negative golden rule, "Do not do to others as you would not have them do to you"). This looks a little better. The crazy person is no longer obligated to murder others. However, they are not in violation of the silver rule if they do go murder someone.

So then I thought about the platinum rule ("do to others as they want done to them"). This rule looks a lot better. Now the crazy person is not allowed to murder people who don't want to be murdered. The only problem with this rule is that it obligates people to satisfy others wants. This seems unreasonable. What if I want to do nothing? Either I need to go against my wants to satisfy others wants or they need to sacrifice their wants so I can keep doing nothing.

I think the best rule would be the negative platinum rule (don't do to others what they don't want done to them). This rule still stops the crazy person and nobody has to fight about whose wants are more important. Is there an official metal name for this rule?

I am an ethical relativist so I don't think that there is such a thing as the right rule. Perhaps just a rule that is better at making more people happy. What do you think?

Do to others what they want to do to you :P Preferably before they can act
 
  • #10
I like Kant's categorical imperitive: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it become a universal law. In other words, act in such a way that if everyone else acted that way, you would like it.
 
  • #11
Jimmy Snyder said:
In other words, act in such a way that if everyone else acted that way, you would like it.

Game theory much?
 
  • #12
Jimmy Snyder said:
I like Kant's categorical imperitive: Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it become a universal law. In other words, act in such a way that if everyone else acted that way, you would like it.

I have heard of this too. It seems to me to be very similar to the silver rule.
 
  • #13
I'll go with the 10 commandments.
 
  • #14
superpaul3000 said:
I think the best rule would be the negative platinum rule (don't do to others what they don't want done to them). This rule still stops the crazy person and nobody has to fight about whose wants are more important.

It doesn't impel that crazy person to murder others, true. But what about the other crazy person who thinks that other people want to be murdered?
 
  • #15
golden rule[/url]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #16
I like Benny Hill's version: http://thinkexist.com/quotation/do-unto-others-then-run/360860.html" :wink:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Must You Have a Card in Hand to Ask for It in Go Fish?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
What is the true meaning of life?
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Is me being selfish that bad if it helps people?
  • · Replies 26 ·
Replies
26
Views
2K
Is zero of nothing nothing? If so, would you write units for nothing?
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Undergrad Born rule as an axiom or as a theorem?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Other "Ten Simple Rules" for Many Aspects of Career Building
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Strict forum rules vs learning science
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
Is mathematics invented or discovered?
  • · Replies 64 ·
3
Replies
64
Views
4K
Finding Meaningful Work: Career Advice for Young Scientists
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
Finding support to complete a UK charity registration application
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K