Sermon for 5 December 2004

 First Unitarian Church of Alton, Illinois

 

THE CORE OF ALL MORALITY

Ronald J. Glossop

 

I.  Introduction

    A.  There seems to be widespread agreement that the basic principle for moral behavior is the Golden Rule: Treat others as you would like to be treated.

    B.  This basic principle is found in all religions, & its centrality to morality is often noted.

         1.  In Christianity, Jesus is quoted in the New Testament (Matthew 7:12) as saying " Do unto others what you would have them do unto you.  This is the Law and the Prophets."

         2.  In Judaism, the Talmud (Shabbat, 31a) says, "What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow men and women. That is the entire Torah; all the rest is commentary."

         3.  In Islam, Mohammed says in the Forty Hadith of an-Nawawi 13,"Not one of you is a believer until he desires for his brothers and sisters that which he desires for himself."

         4.  In the Baha'i faith, in the Gleanings of Baha'u'lla, we read, "He should not wish for others that which he does not wish for himself . . . ."

         5.  In native American religion we find, "Great Spirit, grant that I may not criticize my neighbor until  I have walked a mile in his moccasins."

         6.  In Zoroastrianism (in Dadistani-Dinik 94, 5) we read, "That nature alone is good which refrains from doing to another whatever is not good for its own self."

         7.  In Hinduism, in the Mahabharata (Anusasana Parva 113.8) we read, "Never do to others what you consider disagreeable to yourself.  This is the essence of morality."

         8.  In Buddhism, we have in Udana-Varga 5, 18, "Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful."

         9.  In Jainism, its founder Mahavira Vardhamana is quoted in Sutrakritanga 1.11.33 as saying, "In happiness and suffering, in joy and grief, regard all creatures as you would regard your own self."

       10.  In Sikhism, in Guru Franth Sahib we find, "Be not estranged from another for God dwells in every heart."

       11.  In Confucianism (in Analects:  Sayings of Confucius 15, 23) we read, "Is there one maxim which ought to be acted upon throughout one's life?  Surely it is the maxim of loving-kindness:  do not do to others what you would not have them do to you."

       12.  In Taoism, in Tai-Shang Kan-Ying P'ien we read, "Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss."

    C.  This basic "Golden Rule" principle is also put forth by many moral philosophers.  The most influential and noteworthy example is the famous German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), who argued that the foundation of all morality is "The Categorical Imperative," which is just a very sophisticated way of expressing the Golden Rule.

         1.  Kant's basic way of expressing the Categorical Imperative is:  Act in such a way that you could will that the fundamental principle of your action would become a universal law that everyone must follow.  In other words, Act only according to those principles that you could will that others must follow.  Moral principles must be the same for everyone in similar circumstances. You can't have a rule for everyone else which you don't follow yourself.  A moral rule is a moral rule.  No exceptions are allowed, especially for oneself.

         2.  Among contemporary professional philosphers, during the last two decades more attention is being directed to the role of the Golden Rule as exemplified by the publication of Jeff Wattle's The Golden Rule (Oxford, 1986) and Harry J. Gensler's two books Formal Ethics (Routledge, 1996) and Ethics:  A Contemporary Introduction (Routledge, 1998).

    D.  On the internet one can find several websites and organizations focused on the Golden Rule. One is "The Committee For the Golden Rule."  The Chairman is Rev. Bill McGinnis, and its website says: "Membership on the Committee is open to all people worldwide who desire to promote the Golden Rule, regardless of their age, sex, marital status, economic status, national origin, ethnic background, sexual orientation, political beliefs, religion, race, or any other category whatsover."  This website also says, "Even if you don't believe in God, you should follow the Golden Rule because it will help you get along better in the world."  I'm glad that it is noted that you don't need to believe in God in order to recognize the value of the Golden Rule as a guide for moral behavior, but I don't like the rationale given for using it.  I would rather follow Kant and say that we should follow the Golden Rule just because it is the right thing to do regardless of whether doing so gets us more friends or allows us to be more successful in business or gets us into heaven or gets us anything else.  To try to be moral as a means to some other end is to nullify the morality of the behavior.

 

II.  Although the basic principle of reciprocity is put forward in all the various versions of the Golden Rule advanced by the world's religions, many of the religious traditions violate that principle in their own teachings and practices.

    A.  In most (but not all) of these religions, men and women are not viewed as equal.  Some positions (such as being priests) can be held only by men, and some rights (such as being able to have more than one spouse or being able to own certain kinds of property) belong to men but not women.

    B.  In most (but not all) of these religions, homosexuals do not have equal rights and may even be totally excluded from the religious community.

 

III.  Although the basic principle of reciprocity is put forward in all the various versions of the Golden Rule advanced by the world's religions, there are some differences.

    A.   Sometimes the rule is stated negatively  ("Don't do what you don't want done to you"), and sometimes it is stated positively requiring assistance to others ("Do for others what you would have them do for you.")

         1.  As our discussion continues, I think it will become evident why those who are well off prefer the negative version of the Golden Rule.

         2.  The positive version obviously demands a great deal more of those trying to follow the Golden Rule.  In fact, if taken seriously it means having a lively concern for all other individual persons, something which is virtually impossible for anyone to do.  Who can even imaginarily put themselves in the place of every other individual to see what they might need?  After all, there are over 6 billion people living on the planet now, and there will be even more in the future.

         3.  Thus in practice, this positive version of the Golden Rule (where one must consider the needs of all other persons) turns out to be equivalent to the Greatest Happiness principle: Act to promote the greatest happiness of the greatest number of persons in the long run.  The positive version of the Golden Rule actually makes acting to promote the Greater Happiness a moral obligation, not just a principle that one might choose to adopt.

    B.  If we look again at the various statements of the Golden Rule by the various religions, sometimes it is indicated or suggested that the rule applies selectively to persons close to you and to those in your own group ("your neighbor" or "brothers and sisters") while most of the time it is stated in a universal or inclusive way.  Even when the rule is stated in universal terms, however, it may get interpreted in a selective way to apply only to members of one's own ethnic group or nation or religious group.  Such restricted application of the Golden Rule to the person's own group is one of its greatest limitations.  For example, the killing of foreigners during a war is not usually regarded as a violation of the Golden Rule.  In the Bible, part of the intent of Jesus's story about the Good Samaritan was to get his listeners to extend the scope of the Golden Rule to include Samaritans, a group to which his Jewish audience usually would not apply it.

 

IV.  Several difficulties occur when trying to apply the Golden Rule to particular cases.

    A.  As just indicated, an important problem with regard to the Golden Rule and the principle of reciprocity it embodies is the scope of its application.  Does the principle of reciprocity extend beyond people whom we know or who are in our own group?  Although many cultures have a tradition of being friendly to individual strangers, this friendliness does not get extended to groups of strangers that may constitute a threat to one's own group.  But the universal version of the Golden Rule would make it applicable to all humans regardless of which groups they happen to belong to and whether they are strangers or not.

    B.  If the principle of reciprocity applies to individuals outside of one's own group, it seems that it should apply also to the relations between groups.  In fact, this principle of reciprocity between groups is the basis for international law between nation-states.  Any laws which restrict what national governments can do apply equally to all national governments.

    C.  A major difficulty for applying the Golden Rule to particular situations is the tendency of those with more power to think that because of that power they are exempt from following the principle of reciprocity.  It is a common saying among the military that "rank has its privileges," and that is a common belief among most powerful people even if they don't say it so openly.  Thus it is that slave-owners have routinely excused themselves from treating their slaves humanely, that men have often viewed themselves as having several rights and privileges which women do not have, and that powerful countries have believed they should have certain rights and privileges which less powerful countries do not have.  For example, the leaders of our own country believe that it is perfectly acceptable for this country to have nuclear weapons but that it is unacceptable for certain other countries to have these weapons.  On what grounds is the principle of reciprocity being dismissed?  It seems that Lord Acton got it right when he said, "Power has a tendency to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."  This is an observation that the leaders of this country and also of Israel need to take seriously.

    D.  Applying the Golden Rule requires knowledge (what is the situation of the other party and what will be the likely consequences of particular actions) and imagination (put yourself in the place of others), and that means that it is not likely to be applied to those whose plight is unknown or whose condition is so pathetic that it cannot even be imagined by those who are better off.  I remember that I was once being interviewed on a radio show in which I was arguing for the need for more public spending to deal with the lack of health care for the poor.  One woman called in and in a rather irate tone said, "Why don't they get health insurance?" as if it was a matter of not having foresight.  Her situation was such that she just could not imagine that someone would not be able to afford buying insurance.   So it is that much injustice in our society and in the world is the result of ignorance and indifference rather than meanness.

    E.  Another difficulty to be addressed when applying the Golden Rule to particular cases is the extent to which the principle of reciprocity extends beyond humans?  Should the Golden Rule be applied to animals? Do we have an obligation not to kill and eat other animals?  Should we all be vegetarians?  Are there some animals that it is O.K. to kill and eat but others that should not be killed and eaten?  If so, why? 

    F.  Still another difficulty to be addressed when applying the Golden Rule to particular cases is to determine how far and in what way our moral obligations for protecting human rights based on reciprocity extend beyond normal adult humans.

          1.  One obvious controversial issue with regard to applying the Golden Rule is the right to life, the right not to be killed.  Does this right apply to fetuses?  If so, at what age does it begin to apply--one week, one month, three months, six months?  My mother was very much opposed to abortion.  Why?  Because she herself was born illegitimately and then adopted.  If abortion had been more socially acceptable and available at that time, she undoubtedly would have been aborted.  This issue is a good example of how the Golden Rule works.  What is your reaction to a rule or practice which would have a negative impact on you?

          2.  Is the right to life, to not be killed, dependent on certain other characteristics beyond the fact of just being human?  For example, does it make a difference if the fetus is deficient or deformed in some way?  For another example, does a society have the right to put some of its members to death if they have killed someone else?

    G.  A difficult question for all societies is to determine the extent to which the coercive power of government should be able to be used to enforce the morality of the Golden Rule when individuals refuse to follow it.  The positive version of the Golden Rule seems to require those who are better off to share their abundance to some extent with those who are not so well off.  Should the government be able to use coercion when the amount being shared is deemed to be insufficient?  Is it morally right to tax the rich and powerful in order to provide assistance to the poor?

    H. Another relevant question on that issue of sharing is how much those who are better off are obliged to share with those who are not so well off.  I think that those who are not so well off will have a very different answer to that question than those who are well off.  But what would a neutral moral arbitrator using the Golden Rule say about that question?  I don't know, but it seems to me that there is no doubt that such an arbitrator would condemn the existing international situation where the net flow of wealth for decades has actually been out of the poor countries into the rich countries.  This is a moral disgrace which receives little attention in the popular media.

 

V.  So what can we say in conclusion about the Golden Rule and its relation to morality?

    A.  I think we can say that the Golden Rule provides us a solid intuitive base for morality.  No one has a right to claim exemption from the basic rules that everyone else must follow.  Everyone is morally obliged not do to others what they don't want done to them.

    B.  The negative version of the Golden Rule seems considerably less demanding than the positive version.  The positive and universal rule to treat all others as you would want to be treated if you were in their situation actually makes it a moral obligation to promote the Greatest Happiness of the Greatest Number in the long run.  This version of the Golden Rule  means that those who have more, which includes all of us in this room, are morally obliged to share with those who have less.