Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittvax!wex From: wex@ittvax.UUCP (Alan Wexelblat) Newsgroups: net.philosophy Subject: Re: The Golden Rule Message-ID: <837@ittvax.UUCP> Date: Mon, 11-Jul-83 13:03:19 EDT Article-I.D.: ittvax.837 Posted: Mon Jul 11 13:03:19 1983 Date-Received: Tue, 12-Jul-83 05:12:49 EDT References: ihuxn.276 Lines: 28 Ed Pawlak has missed the point: I objected to the use of the golden rule (in whatever form) \as a basis for morality/ (which was the original proposal). The reason I object, as I tried to point out in my examples, is that it is not desirable (in my opinion) for you -- or anyone else -- to decide what is good for me. Expectations do not come into it. The point I was trying to make with the heroin-addict or the crocodile-god-worshipper[1] is that these were individuals who had decided that something was good for them. By application of the Golden Rule principle, they then went out and tried to give this "good" thing to all others. These examples were picked to illustrate the possible errors that could result from a golden-rule-guided morality. I never argued against doing things for others; I merely argued that you could not assume that such things were a priori "good." --Alan Wexelblat ittvax!wex [1] the crocodile god worshippers are not izod-lovers. Actually, they come from a story told by a friend of mine who is a Florida native. It is a (probably apocryphal) story of natives of Florida who did indeed worship crocodiles before the conquistadores came, and who did in fact sacrifice one of their Spanish friends (who had been adopted into the tribe) to the crocodile god. They were, according to the legend, extremely surprised that the Spaniard's friends were upset, since the dead man was (by their account) now enjoying eternal bliss!