Reflections on Life and Faith,
by David Keating

7 Questions of the Golden Rule - Part 2

February 27, 2008

In my last column I introduced what I've come to call the "7 Questions".

The Questions are based on the Golden Rule and on the old adage about how our choices in life spread out from us in the same way that ripples spread out from a stone thrown into a pond.

People sometimes say that the Golden Rule makes us think that we know what's best for someone else. As we would have them do unto us seems to imply that what we want is also what they should want. In its simplest sense, this actually works. sort of. After all, if I see someone in an accident I stop to help. And it's pretty much a given that if I were in an accident, I'd hope that anyone passing by would stop to help me. Same thing if I see someone starving. It's pretty easy to reach the conclusion that they would appreciate something to eat in the same way that I'd appreciate being given something to eat if I were in the same situation.

But George Bernard Shaw once said "Do not do unto others as you would expect they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same." Indeed.

When we start talking about matters of "taste" Shaw is absolutely correct. We've moved to an entirely different application of the Golden Rule. If it's still going to be what Matthew has Jesus call the thing on which all other rules depend, the way we understand it has to change.

Some people have reworded the Golden Rule to say that we should "do unto others as they would have us do unto them." They're trying to emphasize the idea that we need to "walk a mile in their shoes" before making decisions. That's a good first step; but what if what they would have us do is harmful, either to them or to us? Maybe they want us to help them commit suicide. Or give them all of our money (boy will they be disappointed if I do that).

Self care is another important consideration in our actions. I've known people who were emotionally scarred from trying to take the blame for everything bad that ever happened in the world. Which brings up another old adage that goes something like "if you want to look after others, you have to look after yourself." It's good advice.

That's why the first two Questions are focused on not just the "other" but also on us.

If the choice is whether or not to pull someone from a burning building, then it's pretty easy to say "yes this will have a positive effect on them". On the other hand, if the choice is whether or not to tell them what we overheard at the water cooler, we might have to give it some more thought. Will it really be a positive thing to tell them that we heard a third hand rumour that the boss was getting set to give them the heave ho?

And how will our choice affect us? Let's talk about that next time.

The 7 Questions
Will this decision positively affect:

The "other" (that person or part of Creation most directly touched by your choice)
You
Those closest to the "other"
Those closest to you
Your shared community (neighborhood, workplace, organization)
Other communities (beyond you and the "other")
The world/environment/Creation