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!