If Silence is Golden is Empathy Platinum?

If Silence is Golden is Empathy Platinum?

We have all heard of the Golden Rule, probably the most common version being Jesus’ words in Matthew 7:12, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” This maxim is seen in multiple religions, and at face value is an ideal way to treat others. And while not questioning the original spirit of the phrase, I have to admit, when I have heard it restated as “Treat others the way you want to be treated,” as it often is, it has never really set well with me. I couldn’t quite put my finger on exactly why, I just knew my social work radar went off when I heard it. Recently I went through the cultural diversity training for my new job and they talked about the Platinum Rule, “Do unto others as they themselves would have done unto them.” This was a new term to me, as it may be to you, and immediately sounded better to my social work ear.

Through some research, I found the name was first coined by Milton Bennett in his 1979 book, Basic Concepts of Intracultural Communication, however, the philosopher Karl Popper put forth the nameless ethical principle itself in 1945 in The Open Society and Its Enemies, writing, “The golden rule is a good standard which can perhaps even be improved by doing unto others, wherever possible, as they would be done by.” I wonder if this is closer to the spirit of the Golden Rule, before it was turned into “treat everyone as if they are exactly the same as you.” Steve Dean seems to feel the same, as he pointed out in his March 9, 2015, article “Why the ‘Golden Rule’ is Terrible for Everyone,” on the social publishing platform, Medium, that what the Golden Rule leaves out is empathy. In fact, pushed to the extreme, the Golden Rule allows for such things as harassment, as long as the “harasser” is doing something to someone else they would like to be done to them. The example Dean gives is the “simple, yet insidious” logic of someone catcalling out to a pretty girl on the street with the thinking that they themselves would like to be told they are attractive, “so I should do the same unto them by telling them that they look attractive.” This perfectly follows the Golden Rule, yet anyone who has been on the receiving end of that catcall knows it does not feel so golden. Or empathetic.

As further confirmation of how the Golden Rule can be misconstrued, I found an article on the website TheTrustAmbassador.com that posited treating everyone the same is actually discriminatory because you are inadvertently favoring some – those who want to be treated in whatever way you are treating them – over others who do not want to be treated that way, but instead would prefer to be treated another way. This article even quoted Coach John Wooden, who reportedly said, “The most sure way to play favorites is to treat every player the same way.” Interesting. I realized that all of these reasons are why “treat others the way you want to be treated” never felt right to me. I just never thought it through so thoroughly or put words to it.

As I continued my search to find a common ground morality that could span across intracultural interactions, I found many sources that were discussing both rules as they applied to the workplace - how bosses should employ the Platinum Rule over the Golden Rule when dealing with their employees. One source (womeninleadship.ca) compared the Golden Rule to equality, and the Platinum Rule to equity. As the below cartoon shows, equality gives everyone an equally tall box to stand on, which raises everyone up, but doesn’t solve disparity issues. Equity, however, addresses the disparity and allows everyone to be raised up individually until they are all at the same eye level.

Some required a much taller box to see over the fence, while others needed a shorter box or even no box. (It’s surprising to me, and honestly both saddening and maddening, that this type of leveling of the playing field continues to be controversial, with complaints that it is unfair because some people get more than others in order for the playing field to become level... But I digress, as that could be an entire post – or 50 – in itself.)

This all got me thinking about how many originally good, moral statements are twisted and turned, rephrased and recanted, without any in-depth consideration to how the retelling to fit a particular circumstance or viewpoint actually reshapes the original intended sentiment. Then this rephrasing gets repeated and repeated – and anything repeated THAT much, must be right, RIGHT?? – until it, too, seems like a good, moral sentiment…when it actually isn’t. Such as happened with “treat everyone the way you want to be treated.” Intrigued now with the idea that the Platinum Rule is the way to go, I continued down the rabbit hole. But to my surprise I found naysayers even to the Platinum Rule. And to my further surprise, when peeling back each layer of dissent, I found myself agreeing that they are right, maybe not to completely throw the rule out, but to at least question it. To stay on our toes when it comes to professing a good, moral “rule” in a wonderfully diverse world, in one simple phrase.

In a PowerPoint by Oyewole O. Sarumi, Ph.D. entitled “The Metal Rules Governing Life” he discusses the danger of applying the Platinum Rule beyond the self due to its subjectiveness. He states the rule is “useful as a personal moral compass, but is unable to guide society, since it leaves the rule open to any individual choice of actions.” He elaborated by pointing out that this rule doesn’t allow for creating a list of moral “things to do unto others,” when, in theory at least, the Golden Rule could if the doer made and fulfilled a list of things they would like “done unto them.” The Golden Rule is active whereas the Platinum Rule is subjective, and honestly, impossible to do to perfection, as several philosophers have pointed out, because how can any of us really know how someone else likes to be treated with perfect clarity and understanding in every situation? Not to mention what to do with an impulsive, immature, or depressed person wishing to be treated in a way in the moment that you know is bad for them in the long term? In these scenarios, the Platinum Rule makes us all enablers.

So, what is the answer?? Surprise – like much of life, there is none! Nothing black and white and simple and universal, anyway. There is no magic cliché or popular phrase that covers every person in every situation in every way. Dr. Sarumi makes a suggestion of the Platinum Rule Plus – Treat other people the way their best self would want your best self to treat them. I know this remains subjective for the sheer reason that we are not always our best self, and even when we are, we still aren’t always right. So, I humbly suggest that we follow the Platinum Rule Plus by doing our best to LEARN how others want to be treated and then treat them that way. And when we fail in that, which we will, apologize and learn from it. It seems to me putting forth the effort to learn about others and then adjust our treatment of them according to their wishes will not only deepen our understanding of that person, but also build a relationship that can survive the failures.

Sources:

Golden vs Platinum Rule: Equality vs Equity (womeninleadership.ca)

Platinum rule - Religions Wiki

Golden Rule or Platinum Rule? - (thetrustambassador.com)

Why the “Golden Rule” Is Terrible for Everyone | by Steve Dean | MediumThe metal rules governing life | PPT (slideshare.net)

The metal rules governing life | PPT (slideshare.net)