Almost everyone has heard of the Golden Rule: “Do unto others as you would want done to you.” But not everyone has heard about the Platinum Rule: “Do unto others as they would want done to them.” Because most people tend to follow one rule over the other in trying to live a good life and because I believe we need more “Compassionate Achievers” in the world, I cannot help but wonder: Which rule is better at building compassion? Or to frame it in a more personal way: Who is a more compassionate person…someone who follows the Golden or Platinum Rule? A Platinum Person, I believe, has the compassionate edge for at least three reasons:
(1) Compassion is partially about understanding another’s problem and suffering (the other part of compassion is taking action to address the problem or suffering). The edge in understanding definitely goes to the followers of the Platinum Rule because of their requirement to learn about another’s values and/or cultural background before acting. Before you act in the Platinum Rule, you first seek to understand the values and cultural differences that may be at the heart of what another needs. There is no need for seeking to understand another’s values in the Golden Rule (you do what YOU would want done to YOU) and that leads directly to its second weakness in its compassion comparison with the Platinum Rule.
(2) The Golden Rule is ‘self-centric’ while the Platinum Rule is ‘other-centric’ and compassion is all about the other. The Platinum Rule is learning about “the other” and doing for them what “they would want done to them” based on their unique values and tastes. You can’t get too more focused on the other! As George Bernard Shaw said: “Do not do unto others as you would expect they should do unto you. Their tastes may not be the same.” In contrast, followers of the Golden Rule don’t require any learning about another’s “wants” or tastes because their actions are based entirely on their own perception of how to solve a problem.
(3) The Golden Rule is dogmatic; it never questions the source of how to act—the follower’s own beliefs. E. E. Cummings was right when he wrote “Always the beautiful answer who asks a more beautiful question.” While actions based on the Platinum Rule are born of a question (i.e., what would another want done to them?) and therefore makes the people who follow it more open minded, actions based on the former rule are exclusively born out of the follower’s own beliefs thereby making them, in essence, Golden Rulers (they never question the source of their actions).
My hope in writing this piece is that we engage with each other more often and deeply about how to live a life that is good. With our society’s growing levels of incivility and distrust over the last couple of years, we could use a few more discussions and debates about how to live a good life.
Although I believe that a Platinum Person has the edge when it comes to compassion, we could take Occam’s Razor to both rules and make a more direct and simple edict…the Emerald Edict: Do unto others compassion.
Chris is Professor of Political Science at Western Connecticut State University, a Fulbright Scholar, Director of the Kathwari Honors Program, and founding Director of the Center for Compassion, Creativity & Innovation. He is also the author of "The Compassionate Achiever: How Helping Others Fuels Success" (HarperOne, 2017).
Send this to friend
David Lewis
August 7, 2019
Many folks would like me to join them in their suffering. Since much or perhaps all suffering is self imposed, when I join them I not only don’t help I actually extend their suffering. They want me to sympathize with the hole they put themselves in by being a victim of others.
Am I missing something?
Dr. Chris Kukk
August 7, 2019
Hi, David…Your idea about “joining in their suffering” is empathy (as well as jumping into the “hole”) and not compassion. I’m using compassion as the lens to comparatively view both rules in terms of their foundations of action when solving a problem or addressing suffering. Does a person (the helper) use only their own belief system in helping others (Golden Rule) or does the helper think of the belief system of the one suffering to help solve their problem (Platinum Rule)? It’s the difference between helping a hungry person who follows a strict Kosher or Halal diet by giving them something I may personally eat (i.e. pork meat…which is the Golden Rule but something they are forbidden to eat) or some type of cereal product (knowing that it is something they are allowed to eat…Platinum Rule). All I’m asking is which approach is more compassionate? Both are about helping (joining in their suffering is not helping) but I argue that one helps in ways based on a deeper understanding of another’s beliefs.
Pauline
August 9, 2019
Chris, I thought this was a trick question! Platinum rule every time. I tell my students two things, first of all everybody’s different, and second everything changes. Because we have to be prepared for change, it serves us best to look at opportunities from all possible angles and clued in that of the other. Connections are only possible with compassion, which does require listening and understanding views that may be foreign but are still essential to being fully human. Or at least that’s my belief!