Philo
Sophos
·com

philosophy is for everyone
and not just philosophers

philosophers should know lots
of things besides philosophy


PhiloSophos knowledge base

Philosophical Connections

Pathways to Philosophy programs

Pathways web sites

Philosophy lovers gallery

Science, arts and humanities

PhiloSophos home

home first back 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 forward

Quentin asked:

Instead of the Golden Rule:

"Treat others as you would like to be treated."

Why not the following 'Platinum Rule':

"Treat others as THEY would like to be treated."

With the first, say I am ordering coffee for my friends. Say I have not been told what each desires. So,
under the "Golden Rule" I will simply get X number of my favorite drink (say a latte). Well, that seems
silly. Obviously, instead I should endeavor to know what they would like.

Could you also tell me what "formal" moral philosophy might be said to be closest to my 'Platinum
Rule'?

============

But isn't that how youwant to be treated? In other words, you would want someone to ask
themselves, "what would Quentin like?", right? And that mightbe different from what they would like.
So I think both are equivalent.

But in any case, there are no formal philosophies that I know of which directly and explicitly employ
this rule. Why is that? Because it is not well-thought out. Why shouldyou be treated as you would like
to be treated? What if, for example, you want someone to tell you the truth about things, and that
person knows (or has good reason to believe — and that itself is the start of a long discussion) that
telling you that truth in some instance would harm you or cause you to harm someone else? Should
they tell it to you, even though that's the way you want to be treated? Why? And in answering that
"why" you come to a more fundamental level of analysis than the previous, which implies a much
more sophisticated approach to, and (attempted) answers to, ethical problems. To take another
example, suppose that treating you the way you want to be treated is also treating you the way you
don'twant to be treated? What if youdon't know, or can't decide, or feel ambiguous, or feel two ways
simultaneously?

You see that there are so many problems here that one simply cannot stop at this point. And very few
philosophers have.

Steven Ravett Brown

What I like about your 'Platinum Rule' is that it reminds us that other people may want very different
things from us. But there is one big problem we don't always know how others would like to be
treated. And that, I suppose, is why the 'Golden Rule' was formulated. As humans are all basically
similar, if you can't ask the other person how they want to be treated (and that is just the kind of
situation this rule is meant to cover!), the best guide is your own wants and feelings.

How could you 'endeavour to know' what kind of coffee each of your friends would like, except by
asking them?! I'm sure if your friend was ordering coffee for you, you would like them to ask you what
you want before they order it unless of course they already KNOW what you like best. And the
'Golden Rule' would then suggest that you should treat them in the same way, ask them what THEY
would like.

Katharine Hunt