The Flaw of the Golden Rule?

[Peripheral300]

The original Confucian golden rule suggests that: "One should treat others the way he wants to be treated" AND "One should not treat others the way he wants them to treat him" (the golden rule, paraphrased)

Most Religious systems believe in the Golden Rule and has their own versions of it.

Question: Should Masochists treat others the way he wants to be treated?

And since we're touching the topic of Sado-Masochism (People who likes to hurt and be hurt), and since most of the people here seem to believe in Heaven or Hell, What is hell for Sado-Masochists?

[oversoul1404]

Is masochism a religion per se?

interesting post you have.. here's my opinion..

yes the golden rule, as you say, if we break it down, is comprised of two statements:
1. One should treat others the way he wants to be treated
2. One should not treat others the way he wants them to treat him

Number 1:
suppose you are a masochist, and i am not. you hurt me because you want the same hurting sensation in return. By this, you satisfy the first part of your supposed 'golden rule'. But, on my part, I most certainly dislike what you are doing (segue, of course i'd punch you in return, but that is just that comes later)... let's say, i'm UPSET.

Number 2:
Now, the thing that upsets someone is subjective. like for me, your action towards me upsets me. while if i return the hurt, it would instead satisfy you. For your 'golden rule' to be satisfied, i have to UPSET you the as much as you had me.. because you treated me the way that I do not want, I would treat you the way that you do not want. And that is, by depriving you of the hurt that you are so wanting to feel. This way, I upset you just as you upset me, but you wont get what you want as a masochist. I would satisfy the second part of your rule, but at the same time dissatisfy the first part.

Conclusion:
Seriously, what's up with people nowadays?

[pooch]

The original Confucian golden rule suggests that: "One should treat others the way he wants to be treated" AND "One should not treat others the way he wants them to treat him" (the golden rule, paraphrased)

Most Religious systems believe in the Golden Rule and has their own versions of it.

Question: Should Masochists treat others the way he wants to be treated?

And since we're touching the topic of Sado-Masochism (People who likes to hurt and be hurt), and since most of the people here seem to believe in Heaven or Hell, What is hell for Sado-Masochists?

This is a simplistic application to Christianity -- if at least Christianity should be affected by it. The Lord at least said,

(Mat 7:12 MKJV) Therefore all things, whatever you desire that men should do to you, do even so to them; for this is the Law and the Prophets.

But this is very basic though and it does not encompass the entirety of the Christian faith. Nonetheless, practically speaking, this should be taken as a general principle. Now you are looking at the flaw of the golden rule and this is why I think the Christian principle is Kantian.

The sadomachisist ought to follow a maxim that must be universally accepted -- not merely the maxim of doing something what he wants to be done to him. He must apply his ethics to everyone; otherwise, he will contradict himself.
And so the masochist, in order to remain consistent, must live in a world where everyone wants to hurt themselves...and this world is non-existent. Therefore, the masochist cannot hurt others without good reason or just for the sheer pleasure of it.


I hope that helped.



Pooch

[hellionist]

I think the Golden Rule aims towards positivity. It's about respecting and upholding both parties' wills. Thinking only from your viewpoint and not considering the other person's perspective nullifies the rule. I don't think the Golden Rule aims to promote conflict.

And of course, pushing your own desire to others just so you could receive the same will just get you into trouble. A sadist/masochist will eventually realize this, that's why sadistic/masochistic activities often involve mutual agreements.

As to the question, the answer is no. They could, but again, they would just get into trouble.

The sadomasochism thing, I think, should be a separate topic.

[pooch]

Is masochism a religion per se?

interesting post you have.. here's my opinion..

yes the golden rule, as you say, if we break it down, is comprised of two statements:
1. One should treat others the way he wants to be treated
2. One should not treat others the way he wants them to treat him

Number 1:
suppose you are a masochist, and i am not. you hurt me because you want the same hurting sensation in return. By this, you satisfy the first part of your supposed 'golden rule'. But, on my part, I most certainly dislike what you are doing (segue, of course i'd punch you in return, but that is just that comes later)... let's say, i'm UPSET.

Number 2:
Now, the thing that upsets someone is subjective. like for me, your action towards me upsets me. while if i return the hurt, it would instead satisfy you. For your 'golden rule' to be satisfied, i have to UPSET you the as much as you had me.. because you treated me the way that I do not want, I would treat you the way that you do not want. And that is, by depriving you of the hurt that you are so wanting to feel. This way, I upset you just as you upset me, but you wont get what you want as a masochist. I would satisfy the second part of your rule, but at the same time dissatisfy the first part.

Conclusion:
Seriously, what's up with people nowadays?

Nice preliminary response.

Pooch

[Peripheral300]

Is masochism a religion per se?

Nope... unless we worship pain and create rituals that amount to the religiosity of pain.

Number 2:
Now, the thing that upsets someone is subjective. like for me, your action towards me upsets me. while if i return the hurt, it would instead satisfy you. For your 'golden rule' to be satisfied, i have to UPSET you the as much as you had me.. because you treated me the way that I do not want, I would treat you the way that you do not want. And that is, by depriving you of the hurt that you are so wanting to feel. This way, I upset you just as you upset me, but you wont get what you want as a masochist. I would satisfy the second part of your rule, but at the same time dissatisfy the first part.

Never thought of that before...
And as you've said, what upsets others is subjective....
The only thing that stumps me is: how does one upset a Masochist? Physical and emotional pain both excites the Masoch; Humiliating them also pleasures them. And if we're going to be a bit Sadean to this topic, Death releases them. Indifference does absolutely nothing to them.

Conclusion:
Seriously, what's up with people nowadays?

Different conflicting opinions and interests as well as different individual upbringing creates tension between the self and the other (as Levinas might say)

The sadomasochism thing, I think, should be a separate topic.

Should it? I just added it because my friend and I drunkenly joked about this topic a few nights ago and the topic just popped out of my thoughts while writing this thread. Thank you for the input!

This is a simplistic application to Christianity -- if at least Christianity should be affected by it. The Lord at least said,

(Mat 7:12 MKJV) Therefore all things, whatever you desire that men should do to you, do even so to them; for this is the Law and the Prophets.

But this is very basic though and it does not encompass the entirety of the Christian faith. Nonetheless, practically speaking, this should be taken as a general principle. Now you are looking at the flaw of the golden rule and this is why I think the Christian principle is Kantian.

The sadomachisist ought to follow a maxim that must be universally accepted -- not merely the maxim of doing something what he wants to be done to him. He must apply his ethics to everyone; otherwise, he will contradict himself.
And so the masochist, in order to remain consistent, must live in a world where everyone wants to hurt themselves...and this world is non-existent. Therefore, the masochist cannot hurt others without good reason or just for the sheer pleasure of it.


I hope that helped.

Well I was talking about the Golden Rule as a code of Ethics itself and not about Kantian Ethics or Christian Ethics. But thanks for your reply, nonetheless.

----
Anyway, are there any other flaws with the Golden Rule? I'm asking because I've read somewhere that this rule encompasses other forms of Ethics, and I feel as if I needed something or some argument to disprove him -- the only thing I can think of was the existence of Masochists.

[oversoul1404]

Anyway, are there any other flaws with the Golden Rule? I'm asking because I've read somewhere that this rule encompasses other forms of Ethics, and I feel as if I needed something or some argument to disprove him -- the only thing I can think of was the existence of Masochists.

i completely disagree with you. my interpretation of the golden rule is that it promotes the peaceful coexistence among people. otherwise, then the one who coined it may would have been a masochist himself.

Never thought of that before...
And as you've said, what upsets others is subjective....
The only thing that stumps me is: how does one upset a Masochist? Physical and emotional pain both excites the Masoch; Humiliating them also pleasures them.

as per google, a masochist is a person who is gratified by pain, degradation, etc., that is self-imposed or imposed by others. and to gratify means to satisfy. therefore, if a masochist is denied pain, the he is not gratified and therefore dissatisfied, and with the feeling of dissatisfaction comes the feeling of being upset. that is of course, for a normal human being.

[bishop]

The original Confucian golden rule suggests that: "One should treat others the way he wants to be treated" AND "One should not treat others the way he wants them to treat him" (the golden rule, paraphrased)

Most Religious systems believe in the Golden Rule and has their own versions of it.

Question: Should Masochists treat others the way he wants to be treated?

Peri,

As far as I know, Sado-Masochist already have a clique of their own. In most cultures like minded groups meet regulary to practice and satisfy their appetites. All you need to do is look up 'underground porn' titles and you will see these groups I am talking about.

So yes, they do treat each other as they want to be treated. So, yes, they are still observing the Golden Rule.

And since we're touching the topic of Sado-Masochism (People who likes to hurt and be hurt), and since most of the people here seem to believe in Heaven or Hell, What is hell for Sado-Masochists?

You made a serious flaw in your assumption here.

You assume that the people who practise S&M actually believe in the Judeo-Christian teaching of "Heaven and Hell".

[pooch]

Well I was talking about the Golden Rule as a code of Ethics itself and not about Kantian Ethics or Christian Ethics. But thanks for your reply, nonetheless.

Oh I see..
I got you po.
f that's the case, then I agree with you regarding the criticisms of the golden rule. hehe.

Pooch

[Peripheral300]

@Bishop

As far as I know, Sado-Masochist already have a clique of their own. In most cultures like minded groups meet regulary to practice and satisfy their appetites. All you need to do is look up 'underground porn' titles and you will see these groups I am talking about.

So yes, they do treat each other as they want to be treated. So, yes, they are still observing the Golden Rule.

I see, I do have one comment, though; Sado-Masochism in pornographic industries are not true Sadists or Masochists per se. As what I have researched so far, the sadists are destructive people who will stop at nothing to satisfy their appetites for cruelty and destruction while the masochists are those who are hell-bent on achieving body pleasure, self-destructive or not. Death is the finality which binds these two perverse schools of thought.

Now if we were to take in Von Masoch and Donatien de Sade (the fathers of the Sado-Masochist school of thought) as the leaders, you would realize that they are not only limited within the streams of "underground porn". In fact, Alphonse-Donatien de Sade was a marquis of 17th Century France! His exploits did not only live in his writings but also in real life.

The point here being that, given that in a given society there walks a Masochist who will stop at nothing to achieve pleasure, I believe that the Golden Rule would not apply to him and would, in fact, harm others.

You made a serious flaw in your assumption here.

You assume that the people who practise S&M actually believe in the Judeo-Christian teaching of "Heaven and Hell".

I agree to some extent but I would have to answer you in the other thread!

But in all sincerity, thank you Kuya (?) Bishop, for answering!

---------- Post added at 11:30 AM ---------- Previous post was at 11:22 AM ----------

@Oversoul

i completely disagree with you. my interpretation of the golden rule is that it promotes the peaceful coexistence among people. otherwise, then the one who coined it may would have been a masochist himself.

It does promote a peaceful coexistence among people but the bone I have to pick with is the fact that the "Treatability" (there's no such word but let's just imagine that there is) of other people is subjective. Which may be why I chose a group of people whose beliefs are that of gratification of Pain.

[bishop]

@Bishop
I see, I do have one comment, though; Sado-Masochism in pornographic industries are not true Sadists or Masochists per se. As what I have researched so far, the sadists are destructive people who will stop at nothing to satisfy their appetites for cruelty and destruction while the masochists are those who are hell-bent on achieving body pleasure, self-destructive or not. Death is the finality which binds these two perverse schools of thought.

Now if we were to take in Von Masoch and Donatien de Sade (the fathers of the Sado-Masochist school of thought) as the leaders, you would realize that they are not only limited within the streams of "underground porn". In fact, Alphonse-Donatien de Sade was a marquis of 17th Century France! His exploits did not only live in his writings but also in real life.

The point here being that, given that in a given society there walks a Masochist who will stop at nothing to achieve pleasure, I believe that the Golden Rule would not apply to him and would, in fact, harm others.

Peri,

In the case of your points I have underlined, then the focus of the subject changes from "Sado-Masochists" as a group of individuals deserving or undeserving of the Golden Rule, to that of the Root Nature of Sado-Masochism.

I was in the understanding that you were refering to the present day practitioners of Sado-Masochism, which is indeed a sub-culture (albeit Taboo) within a particular Society.

And these present-day practitioners are the cliques I was refering to and whose actions are limited to sexual gratification. No more, no less.

But if we focus on Sado-Masochism as a Psychological condition, when you refer to the actions of the individuals they were named after, then we would be dealing with Psychosis and mental illness.

Case in point: The Marquis de Sade was commited to a mental instituion for many years.

Another individual in history who exhibited similar mental illness was Caligula Ceasar. He not only was a Sadi-Masochist before the term was even coined, he was a megalomaniac.

I can go on and on.

But bottom line is this:

If we are refering to the present-day Sado-Masochist who delve into the practice simply to seek sexual gratification by giving and recieving (a certain amount) of pain, then my point stands. They do practice the Golden Rule. Albeit among themselves.

But if we refer to the mental illness underlying the clinical definition of Sado-Masochism, then that would be a different issue all together.

We would be bringing to the front individuals such as Jack the Ripper or Ted Bundy.

And in these cases, then 'no', the Golden Rule should not apply.

[Androniko]

kung alam mong palpak ang isang pangkat o uri ng tao, bakit mo ipipilit sa kanila ang banal na kautusan na hindi nga nila kinikilala? Ang pagtanggi sa anumang patakaran at kautusan ay minsan nagiging batayan upang masabing may tinatakasan lang silang dahilan upang maidiin sila sa mga pagkakamali nila at nagagawa nilang masasama.

[nightcomer]

What is hell for Sado-Masochists?

Hell fire prepared for those who are unfortunate and sinful.

Hell fire is the hell for sado-masochists.

[glen]

Most Religious systems believe in the Golden Rule and has their own versions of it.

Question: Should Masochists treat others the way he wants to be treated?
This is a wrong representation. Walang correlation between Masochism and Religion.
Pero kung ipipilit mo talaga - ang tanong siguro is ano ang Religion ng Masochist na tinutukoy mo dito? If alam natin ito then we can base our "hypothesis" on that specific religious system.

And since we're touching the topic of Sado-Masochism (People who likes to hurt and be hurt), and since most of the people here seem to believe in Heaven or Hell, What is hell for Sado-Masochists?
Again this is another wrong representation - walang correlation ang Sado-Masochism with Heaven or Hell.
However, in my opinion, kung saan ka masaya Heaven mo yun, kung saan a malungkot at naghihirap eh hell yun. So kung i-apply natin sa Sado-Masochism - kung masaya siya manakit heaven niya yun yung masaya na nasasaktan eh heaven din niya yun.

Again, ibalik natin sa tanong na ano ang religion ng taong tinutukoy mo? Para meron tayo basis sa discussion.