Talk:Silver Rule

reduction

I'm not sure, but it looks to me that, in the handshake example, the Silver Rule (Treat others in the way that they wish to be treated) can be reduced to the Golden rule (Treat others in the way you wish to be treated). If you want that people shake your hand the way you like, then even if you don't like a firm handshake you would be treating someone like you want to be treated if you use a firm handshake when handshaking someone that likes it.

A.Z. 01:25, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

That's not what I was taught the silver rule was. I was taught it was 'If you can't say anything nice, don't say anything at all'. Are you SURE the silver rule is to treat others as they wish to be treated? Unknown contributor

I am pretty sure the silver rule is to treat others how they wish to be treated 92.7.154.82 (talk) 18:12, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Comment #3 According to Robert Spitzer, S.J., Ph.D., President of Gonzaga University, the "Silver Rule" is "Do no harm" (The Life Principles, 1999). This Silver Rule, "Do no harm" is similar to the rule of reciprocity as taught by most major religions, and can be researched easily with consistent results that refute this wikipedia article. The first commentator above perfectly states the absurdity and uselessness of this wikipedia definition which has no history or references. Daveheathr@aol.com 02/07 92.7.154.82 (talk) 18:12, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Silver Rule major revision

The previous entry was a fabrication with no historical references. This entry is reference to the President of Gonzaga University and can be validated in historical literature and many websites. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Daveheathr (talk • contribs) 06:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC).

Robert Spitzer is one guy, he is not an absolute authority on the subject. The silver rule is commonly understood to be "do not do unto others as you would not have them do unto you"--i.e., the golden rule with negations on both clauses. The Spitzer definition is radically underdetermined, like Aquinas' rule "cleave to the good and avoid that which is wrong"--ok, but how do I tell which is which? The golden rule and silver rule as commonly understood purport to suggest a test for determining what immoral "harm" is: it's that stuff that you don't want others to do to you, or the absence of the stuff you want them them to do to you. Whether that's right or not, it's a lot more useful. Anyway, google backs me up that this is the common understanding: "silver rule" "do no harm" gets 167 hits, "silver rule" "do not unto" and "silver rule" "do not do" together get about 2000. I'm revising the article accordingly, but noting other uses.

I also took out some of the criticism of the golden rule, this is covered better within that article itself.--ScottForschler (talk) 02:06, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

I agree with the added tags that indicate the need for tone revision and needed citations; my recent editing was done to correct some major errors and bias in the previous version but is still inadequate. I think Wattles's book on The Golden Rule has some discussion of the SR, and there's also a book "The GR and the SR" which I suspect explicitly discusses this further, but I won't have time to get copies of these for another month, if someone else can find the documentation in the meantime this would help.--ScottForschler (talk) 13:38, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

passive reciprocity vs no harm

There is also a book "Golden Rules And Silver Rules Of Humanity: Universal Wisdom Of Civilization" by Q. C. Terry. You can find it on amazon.com. The both (golden and silver) rules are written on its cover: amazon.com/image.

I do not like the "do no harm" definition of the silver rule. It is shorter, but the "harm" is not defined and ambiguous. I would put the reciprocal interpretation "do not do unto others what you would not have them do unto you" first. Spitzer has it in "Examining Trends in Ethics". This would relate the silver rule more to thegolden rule and separate it from non-agression and harm principle. Kopovoi 10:53, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

this distinction is a load of cr..

It appears as the first commenter suggested that saying " do unto others and you want done unto you" means the same exact thing as "dont do unto others as you dont want to be done unto you". I cant see how someone would ever see it different. And I dont believe citing a book at amazon.com serves a valid source. Darwinzape 05:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't believe that either of your assertations is correct, sorry. David spector (talk) 02:44, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

It's a matter of acting in positivity vs restraint from acting in negativity. The two are not the same. XwasssabiX (talk) 02:48, 21 March 2019 (UTC)

Silver Rule and Thomas Hobbes?

Didn't Thomas Hobbes in Leviathan have something like the Silver Rule? Septagram 01:26, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Confucius?

No mention of Confucius' line "Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire." —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.32.36.248 (talk) 18:30, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I've also heard the silver rule attributed to Confucious. (70.254.33.125 (talk) 22:23, 26 November 2009 (UTC))

05:19, 18 June 2011

I removed a paragraph that was very meandering and rhetorical. It did not add much, if anything, to the entry. It adds little to our understanding of the Silver Rule, and I don't think it is just the wording--It has little content. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.7.174.193 (talk) 05:25, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Parallelism

"...however the latter preserves the parallelism with the Golden Rule."

Removed this from the last sentence. It is a moot point. "Do no harm" is equally consistent with the Golden Rule, unless you 'would have harm done unto yourself'. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DoItAgain (talk • contribs) 05:36, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Hillel's statement

In the talmud, masechet Shabbat, 31, A, Hillel said to a non-Jew who was considering conversion: דעלך סני לחברך לא תעביד what is hateful to you, do not do (to others) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.239.215.130 (talk) 01:55, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

New Silver Rule

I agree that derivations of the Golden Rule do not deserve status as a separate rule. I prefer this new rule, which states "do not expect others to do unto you as you do unto them," as proposed here: http://www.ploozer.com/2012/02/silver-rule.html . The new rule adds a helpful philosophy that is missing from the Goldened IP -->

The Wikipedia lacks a Silver Rule and an Iron Rule

Hello, my proposal is that someone should modify the paragraphs of the Wikipedia article called "Golden Rule" which starts as follows:

"The Old Testament Deuterocanonical books of Tobit and Sirach, accepted as part of the Scriptural canon by Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodoxy, and the Non-Chalcedonian Churches, express a negative form of the golden rule: ..."

and add a Subchapter titled "Silver Rule" to the above-mentioned Wikipedia article, because of...

... two or three religious points of view:

[please, excuse me for any spelling and Grammar errors, as Spanish is my mother tongue]

1.

From India (Mahabharata, 5, 1517):

'This is the sum of duty. Do not unto others that which would cause you pain if done to you'

at:

https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/749707-this-is-the-sum-of-duty-do-not-unto-others

— — —

2.

"10. As you wish no evil to befall you, but to partake of all that is good, so should you act on the same principle towards your subjects." Aristaeus.* 

Under number 10, at:

http://www.homeplanet.org/fourint.html

• A minor god in Greek mythology, something which I did not know, but by searching in the Wikipedia, I have found that. So, it seems that in ancient times, the gods spake to the mortal ones (ha), or maybe it was Aristaeus the Elder, https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Aristaeus_the_Elder

— — —

3.

In the Book of Tobit, included only in Catholic Bibles, Tobit 4, 15 reads as follows:

15 Never do to anyone else anything that you would not want someone to do to you.

Do not drink so much wine that you get drunk, and do not let drinking become a habit.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Tobit+4%3A15%2CMatthew+7%3A12%2CLuke+6%3A31&version=GNT

[...]

And at:

http://www.vatican.va/archive/bible/nova_vulgata/documents/nova-vulgata_vt_thobis_lt.html

Some similar phrases in Latin language:

the second paragraph of Tobit 4, 14 and the first paragraph of Tobit 4, 15:

"Attende tibi, fili, in omnibus operibus tuis et esto sapiens in omnibus sermonibus tuis et, quod oderis, nemine feceris."

Which, by using Google Translator "anyone can" translate from Latin into English:

"Watch yourself, my son, in everything you do, and discipline yourself in all your conduct, and that which you hate, do not do to anyone."

— — — — — — — — — — — — — —

LAST BUT NOT LEAST:

Because of:

https://www.christiancourier.com/articles/9-gold-silver-and-iron-three-rules-of-human-conduct

Besides, me thinks that someone should create an article called "Iron Rule" for the Wikipedia in English.

— — —

Theophilus Brown Larimore

https://www.google.com.mx/search?q=Theophilus+Brown+Larimore&rlz=1C1ASUM_enMX763MX763&oq=Theophilus+Brown+Larimore&aqs=chrome..69i57.8686j0j8&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

— — — — — — — — — — — —

Of course, about the Golden Rule:

I own a book... its title is: Good News for Modern Man;* and, according to its cover, it is: "The New Testament + In Today's English Version".

On page 16, Matthew 7, 12 one can read the following:

12 "Do for others what you want them to do for you: this is the meaning of the Law of Moses and the teaching of the prophets."

• Third Edition, American Bible Society, New York, 1971.

"Imprimatur + John Francis Whealon, S.T.L., S.S.L. Archbishop of Hartford, April 15, 1971."

Heterotrofo (talk) 22:40, 7 May 2018 (UTC)