Suppose that I want to steal Pat's computer. To apply the golden rule, I'd imagine myself in Pat's exact place. I'd ask myself, "Do I consent to the idea of someone stealing my computer in such a case?" If the answer is NO, then it follows that I ought not to steal Pat's computer.
Suppose that I want to steal Pat's computer. To apply the golden rule, I'd imagine myself in Pat's exact place. I'd ask myself, "Do I consent to the idea of someone stealing my computer in such a case?" If the answer is NO, then it follows that I ought not to steal Pat's computer.
This reasoning may seem sensible, but the if-then form of the golden rule that it uses can lead to absurd results if applied to a person with evil or inconsistent desires.
Suppose that I want to steal Pat's computer. To apply the golden rule, I'd imagine myself in Pat's exact place. I'd ask myself, "Do I consent to the idea of someone stealing my computer in such a case?" If the answer is NO, then it follows that I ought not to steal Pat's computer.
The golden rule is a consistency principle, prescribing that our actions (toward another) be in harmony with our desires (about how we be treated in similar circumstances). It doesn't tell us specifically how we ought to act.
If I steal Pat's computer, but don't consent the idea of my computer being stolen in an exactly similar situation, then I'm inconsistent. And I ought not to be inconsistent in this way.