The Golden Rule is the principle of treating others as one would want to be treated by them. It is sometimes called an ethics of reciprocity, meaning that one should reciprocate to others how one would like them to treat the person (not necessarily how they actually treat them). Various expressions of this rule can be found in the tenets of most religions and creeds through the ages.
The maxim may appear as a positive or negative injunction governing conduct:
Treat others as one would like others to treat them (positive or directive form)
Do not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated (negative or prohibitive form)
What one wishes upon others, they wish upon themselves (empathetic or responsive form)
The negative form is sometimes called the Silver Rule in order to distinguish it from the positive form.
Contents
Etymology
The term "Golden Rule", or "Golden law", began to be used widely in the early 17th century in Britain by Anglican theologians and preachers; the earliest known usage is that of Anglicans Charles Gibbon and Thomas Jackson in 1604.
Ancient history
Ancient Egypt
Possibly the earliest affirmation of the maxim of reciprocity, reflecting the ancient Egyptian goddess Ma'at, appears in the story of "The Eloquent Peasant", which dates to the Middle Kingdom (c. 2040–1650 BCE): "Now this is the command: Do to the doer to make him do." This proverb embodies the do ut des principle. A Late Period (c. 664–323 BCE) papyrus contains an early negative form of the Golden Rule: "That which you hate to be done to you, do not do to another."
Ancient China
Possibly the earliest idea of the prohibitive form of the Golden Rule is proposed by Confucius (c. 551 – c. 479 BCE):
The same idea is also presented in V.12 and VI.30 of the Analects (c. 500 BCE), which can be found in the online Chinese Text Project. The phraseology differs from the Christian version of the Golden Rule. It does not presume to do anything unto others, but merely to avoid doing what would be harmful. It does not preclude doing good deeds and taking moral positions.
In relation to the Golden Rule, Confucian philosopher Mencius said "If one acts with a vigorous effort at the law of reciprocity, when he seeks for the realization of perfect virtue, nothing can be closer than his approximation to it."
The sage has no interest of his own, but takes the interests of the people as his own. He is kind to the kind; he is also kind to the unkind: for Virtue is kind. He is faithful to the faithful; he is also faithful to the unfaithful: for Virtue is faithful.
If people regarded other people's states in the same way that they regard their own, who then would incite their own state to attack that of another? For one would do for others as one would do for oneself. If people regarded other people's cities in the same way that they regard their own, who then would incite their own city to attack that of another? For one would do for others as one would do for oneself. If people regarded other people's families in the same way that they regard their own, who then would incite their own family to attack that of another? For one would do for others as one would do for oneself. And so if states and cities do not attack one another and families do not wreak havoc upon and steal from one another, would this be a harm to the world or a benefit? Of course one must say it is a benefit to the world.
Mozi regarded the Golden Rule as a corollary to the cardinal virtue of impartiality, and encouraged egalitarianism and selflessness in relationships.
Ancient India
In Mahābhārata, the ancient epic of India, Vyasa says:
Do not to others what you do not wish done to yourself; and wish for others too what you desire and long for for yourself–this is the whole of Dharma; heed it well
The Mahābhārata is usually dated to the period between 400 BCE and 400 CE.
In Chapter 32 in the Book of Virtue of the Tirukkuṛaḷ (c. 1st century BCE to 5th century CE), Valluvar says:
Do not do to others what you know has hurt yourself.
Why does one hurt others knowing what it is to be hurt?
Furthermore, in verse 312, Valluvar says that it is the determination or code of the spotless (virtuous) not to do evil, even in return, to those who have cherished enmity and done them evil. According to him, the proper punishment to those who have done evil is to put them to shame by showing them kindness, in return and to forget both the evil and the good done on both sides (verse 314).
Ancient Greece
The Golden Rule in its prohibitive (negative) form was a common principle in ancient Greek philosophy. Examples of the general concept include:
"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." – Thales (c. 624 – c. 546 BCE)
"What you do not want to happen to you, do not do it yourself either." – Sextus the Pythagorean. The oldest extant reference to Sextus is by Origen in the third century of the common era.
"Ideally, no one should touch my property or tamper with it, unless I have given him some sort of permission, and, if I am sensible I shall treat the property of others with the same respect." – Plato (c. 420 – c. 347 BCE)
"Do not do to others that which angers you when they do it to you." – Isocrates (436–338 BCE)
"It is impossible to live a pleasant life without living wisely and well and justly, and it is impossible to live wisely and well and justly without living pleasantly." – Epicurus (341–270 BC) where "justly" refers to "an agreement made in reciprocal association ... against the infliction or suffering of harm."
Ancient Persia
The Pahlavi Texts of Zoroastrianism (c. 300 BCE – 1000 CE) were an early source for the Golden Rule: "That nature alone is good which refrains from doing to another whatsoever is not good for itself." Dadestan-I-denig, 94,5, and "Whatever is disagreeable to yourself do not do unto others." Shayast-na-Shayast 13:29
Ancient Rome
Seneca the Younger (c. 4 BCE – 65 CE), a practitioner of Stoicism (c. 300 BCE – 200 CE), expressed a hierarchical variation of the Golden Rule in his Letter 47, an essay regarding the treatment of slaves: "Treat your inferior as you would wish your superior to treat you."
Religious context
According to Simon Blackburn, the Golden Rule "can be found in some form in almost every ethical tradition". A multi-faith poster showing the Golden Rule in sacred writings from 13 faith traditions (designed by Paul McKenna of Scarboro Missions, 2000) has been on permanent display at the Headquarters of the United Nations since 4 January 2002. Creating the poster "took five years of research that included consultations with experts in each of the 13 faith groups." (See also the section on Global Ethic.)
Abrahamic religions
A rule of reciprocal altruism was stated positively in a well-known Torah verse (Hebrew: ואהבת לרעך כמוך):
You shall not take vengeance or bear a grudge against your kinsfolk. Love your neighbor as yourself: I am the LORD.
According to John J. Collins of Yale Divinity School, most modern scholars, with Richard Elliott Friedman as a prominent exception, view the command as applicable to fellow Israelites.
Rashi commented what constitutes revenge and grudge, using the example of two men. One man would not lend the other his axe, then the next day, the same man asks the other for his axe. If the second man should say, "'I will not lend it to you, just as you did not lend to me,' it constitutes revenge; if 'Here it is for you; I am not like you, who did not lend me,' it constitutes a grudge. Rashi concludes his commentary by quoting Rabbi Akiva on love of neighbor: 'This is a fundamental [all-inclusive] principle of the Torah.'"
Hillel the Elder (c. 110 BCE – 10 CE) used this verse as a most important message of the Torah for his teachings. Once, he was challenged by a gentile who asked to be converted under the condition that the Torah be explained to him while he stood on one foot. Hillel accepted him as a candidate for conversion to Judaism but, drawing on Leviticus 19:18, briefed the man:
What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation; go and learn.
Hillel recognized brotherly love as the fundamental principle of Jewish ethics. Rabbi Akiva agreed, while Simeon ben Azzai suggested that the principle of love must have its foundation in Genesis chapter 1, which teaches that all men are the offspring of Adam, who was made in the image of God. According to Jewish rabbinic literature, the first man Adam represents the unity of mankind. This is echoed in the modern preamble of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It is also taught that Adam is last in order according to the evolutionary character of God's creation:
Indian religions
One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one's own self. This, in brief, is the rule of dharma. Other behavior is due to selfish desires.
By making dharma your main focus, treat others as you treat yourself
Also,
If the entire Dharma can be said in a few words, then it is—that which is unfavorable to us, do not do that to others.
Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama, c. 623–543 BCE) made the negative formulation of the golden rule one of the cornerstones of his ethics in the 6th century BCE. It occurs in many places and in many forms throughout the Tripitaka.
Comparing oneself to others in such terms as "Just as I am so are they, just as they are so am I," he should neither kill nor cause others to kill.
One who, while himself seeking happiness, oppresses with violence other beings who also desire happiness, will not attain happiness hereafter.
Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
Putting oneself in the place of another, one should not kill nor cause another to kill.
The Golden Rule is paramount in the Jainist philosophy and can be seen in the doctrines of ahimsa and karma. As part of the prohibition of causing any living beings to suffer, Jainism forbids inflicting upon others what is harmful to oneself.
The following line from the Acaranga Sutra sums up the philosophy of Jainism:
Nothing which breathes, which exists, which lives, or which has essence or potential of life, should be destroyed or ruled over, or subjugated, or harmed, or denied of its essence or potential.
Chinese religions
The sage has no interest of his own, but takes the interests of the people as his own. He is kind to the kind; he is also kind to the unkind: for Virtue is kind. He is faithful to the faithful; he is also faithful to the unfaithful: for Virtue is faithful.
Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss.
Iranian religions
Do not do unto others whatever is injurious to yourself.
New religious movements
Hear ye these words and heed them well, the words of Dea, thy Mother Goddess, "I command thee thus, O children of the Earth, that that which ye deem harmful unto thyself, the very same shall ye be forbidden from doing unto another, for violence and hatred give rise to the same. My command is thus, that ye shall return all violence and hatred with peacefulness and love, for my Law is love unto all things. Only through love shall ye have peace; yea and verily, only peace and love will cure the world, and subdue all evil."
Try not to do things to others that you would not like them to do to you.
Try to treat others as you would want them to treat you.
Traditional African religions
One who is going to take a pointed stick to pinch a baby bird should first try it on himself to feel how it hurts.
Secular context
Global ethic
The "Declaration Toward a Global Ethic" from the Parliament of the World's Religions (1993) proclaimed the Golden Rule ("We must treat others as we wish others to treat us") as the common principle for many religions. The Initial Declaration was signed by 143 leaders from all of the world's major faiths, including Baháʼí Faith, Brahmanism, Brahma Kumaris, Buddhism, Christianity, Hinduism, Indigenous, Interfaith, Islam, Jainism, Judaism, Native American, Neo-Pagan, Sikhism, Taoism, Theosophist, Unitarian Universalist and Zoroastrian.
In the view of Greg M. Epstein, a Humanist chaplain at Harvard University, "'do unto others' ... is a concept that essentially no religion misses entirely. But not a single one of these versions of the golden rule requires a God." Various sources identify the Golden Rule as a humanist principle:
Trying to live according to the Golden Rule means trying to empathise with other people, including those who may be very different from us. Empathy is at the root of kindness, compassion, understanding and respect – qualities that we all appreciate being shown, whoever we are, whatever we think and wherever we come from. And although it isn't possible to know what it really feels like to be a different person or live in different circumstances and have different life experiences, it isn't difficult for most of us to imagine what would cause us suffering and to try to avoid causing suffering to others. For this reason many people find the Golden Rule's corollary – "do not treat people in a way you would not wish to be treated yourself" – more pragmatic.
Do not do to others what you would not want them to do to you. ... [is] the single greatest, simplest, and most important moral axiom humanity has ever invented, one which reappears in the writings of almost every culture and religion throughout history, the one we know as the Golden Rule.
Moral directives do not need to be complex or obscure to be worthwhile, and in fact, it is precisely this rule's simplicity which makes it great. It is easy to come up with, easy to understand, and easy to apply, and these three things are the hallmarks of a strong and healthy moral system. The idea behind it is readily graspable: before performing an action which might harm another person, try to imagine yourself in their position, and consider whether you would want to be the recipient of that action. If you would not want to be in such a position, the other person probably would not either, and so you should not do it. It is the basic and fundamental human trait of empathy, the ability to vicariously experience how another is feeling, that makes this possible, and it is the principle of empathy by which we should live our lives.
Other contexts
Human rights
According to Marc H. Bornstein, and William E. Paden, the Golden Rule is arguably the most essential basis for the modern concept of human rights, in which each individual has a right to just treatment, and a reciprocal responsibility to ensure justice for others.
However, Leo Damrosch argued that, the notion that the Golden Rule pertains to "rights" per se, is a contemporary interpretation and has nothing to do with its origin. The development of human "rights" is a modern political ideal that began as a philosophical concept promulgated through the philosophy of Jean Jacques Rousseau in 18th century France, among others. His writings influenced Thomas Jefferson, who then incorporated Rousseau's reference to "inalienable rights" into the United States Declaration of Independence in 1776. Damrosch argued that to confuse the Golden Rule with human rights is to apply contemporary thinking to ancient concepts.
Variations
The Platinum Rule has been said to be stated as, "Do to others as they would have you do to them." Taken in the spirit of the Golden Rule, this suggests one should be familiar or at least consider the desires of the person they're interacting with. However, this is the flaw of the rule in that it requires one to stereotype or make broad assumptions about a stranger's interests and personality before interacting with them. These kind of assumptions are often erroneous and therefore a prudent person would avoid the interaction knowing their assumptions are likely incorrect. This rule is prohibitive to communication and prefers no interaction over any interaction with strangers. On occasion, stereotypes may be applied and in rare cases are largely correct. In those situations this rule can be applied successfully.
On the other hand, the Platinum Rule is broadly successful when interacting with familiar people and directs that all interaction be conducted in a manner the person would like to be treated. This demonstrates respect and the desire to favorably regard the person one is interacting with. Unfortunately, this can lead to a dependent relationship, developing a psychological tendency to expect similar treatment in all relationships and avoid forming new relationships where this treatment would not exist simply from not knowing the individuals preferences.
Despite the unusual cases stifling interaction or individuals developing a demand for this behavior from others, the Platinum Rule requires due consideration, self-control, and receiver analysis. Taken altogether, the Platinum Rule represents a gesture of kindness, and is an established norm in various industries, such as marketing, medical care, motivational speaking, and many others. As a consequence, some argue the Golden Rule is outdated, self-absorbed, and grossly fails to consider the needs of others.
Science and economics
Some published research argues that some 'sense' of fair play and the Golden Rule may be stated and rooted in terms of neuroscientific and neuroethical principles.
The Golden Rule can also be explained from the perspectives of psychology, philosophy, sociology, human evolution, and economics. Psychologically, it involves a person empathizing with others. Philosophically, it involves a person perceiving their neighbor also as "I" or "self". Sociologically, "love your neighbor as yourself" is applicable between individuals, between groups, and also between individuals and groups. In evolution, "reciprocal altruism" is seen as a distinctive advance in the capacity of human groups to survive and reproduce, as their exceptional brains demanded exceptionally long childhoods and ongoing provision and protection even beyond that of the immediate family. In economics, Richard Swift, referring to ideas from David Graeber, suggests that "without some kind of reciprocity society would no longer be able to exist."
Study of other primates provides evidence that the Golden Rule exists in other non-human species.
Criticism
Philosophers such as Immanuel Kant and Friedrich Nietzsche have objected to the rule on a variety of grounds. One is the epistemic question of determining how others want to be treated. The obvious way is to ask them, but they might give duplicitous answers if they find this strategically useful, and they might also fail to understand the details of the choice situation as one understands it. People might also be biased to perceiving harms and benefits to themselves more than to others, which could lead to escalating conflict if they are suspicious of others. Hence Linus Pauling suggested that a bias towards others is to be introduced into the golden rule: "Do unto others 20 percent better than you would have them do unto you" - to correct for subjective bias.
Differences in values or interests
George Bernard Shaw wrote, "Do not do unto others as you would that they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same." This suggests that if one's values are not shared with others, the way one wants to be treated will not be the way others want to be treated. Hence, the Golden Rule of "do unto others" is "dangerous in the wrong hands", according to philosopher Iain King, because "some fanatics have no aversion to death: the Golden Rule might inspire them to kill others in suicide missions."
Walter Terence Stace, in The Concept of Morals (1937) argued that Shaw's remark
...seems to overlook the fact that "doing as you would be done by" includes taking into account your neighbour's tastes as you would that he should take yours into account. Thus the "golden rule" might still express the essence of a universal morality even if no two men in the world had any needs or tastes in common.
Differences in situations
Immanuel Kant famously criticized the golden rule for not being sensitive to differences of situation, noting that a prisoner duly convicted of a crime could appeal to the golden rule while asking the judge to release him, pointing out that the judge would not want anyone else to send him to prison, so he should not do so to others. On the other hand, in a critique of the consistency of Kant's writings, several authors have noted the similarity between the Golden Rule and Kant's concept of the categorical imperative.
This was perhaps a well-known objection, as Leibniz actually responded to it long before Kant made it, suggesting that the judge should put himself in the place, not merely of the criminal, but of all affected persons and then judging each option (to inflict punishment, or release the criminal, etc.) by whether there was a "greater good in which this lesser evil was included".
Other responses to criticisms
Marcus George Singer observed that there are two importantly different ways of looking at the golden rule: as requiring either that one performs specific actions that they want others to do to them or that they guide their behavior in the same general ways that they want others to. Counter-examples to the Golden Rule typically are more forceful against the first than the second.
In his book on the Golden Rule, Jeffrey Wattles makes the similar observation that such objections typically arise while applying the Golden Rule in certain general ways (namely, ignoring differences in taste or situation, failing to compensate for subjective bias, etc.) But if people apply the golden rule to their own method of using it, asking in effect if they would want other people to apply the Golden Rule in such ways, the answer would typically be no, since others' ignoring of such factors will lead to behavior which people object to. It follows that people should not do so themselves—according to the Golden Rule. In this way, the Golden Rule may be self-correcting. An article by Jouni Reinikainen develops this suggestion in greater detail.
It is possible, then, that the golden rule can itself guide people in identifying which differences of situation are morally relevant. People would often want other people to ignore any prejudice against their race or nationality when deciding how to act towards them, but would also want others to not ignore their differing preferences in food, desire for aggressiveness, and so on. This principle of "doing unto others, wherever possible, as they would be done by..." has sometimes been termed the Platinum Rule.
Popular references
Charles Kingsley's The Water Babies (1863) includes a character named Mrs Do-As-You-Would-Be-Done-By (and another, Mrs Be-Done-By-As-You-Did).
In the TV series Fallout, the character Lucy MacLean refers to the Golden Rule multiple times, and the second episode of the second season is titled "The Golden Rule".