I don’t know why this is scored below 0, but I also didn’t get a lot from this, so I would not normally vote it up or down.
I think you’ve come across something valuable for yourself though, the fact that the golden rule isn’t actually a moral theory that works very well without several caveats. Things like “I like blue so I should paint all of your stuff blue” are invalid and suggest the first addendum you noted: it should actually read “Treat others as they want to be treated”.
I think it is phrased how it is to add a hook in the user’s mind for empathy. The idiom is meant to remind you that others have experiences too. However, the principle, when adjusted for truthfulness, is basically “Treat other people nicely”, which is not catchy or really useful. I think perhaps this chain of thought was simple enough that it didn’t “pull up on” the score for your post.
I think you may have gotten pushback on much of the middle of the body as well, where I see points like “do nothing”, which some readers may recognize isn’t really an option (doing nothing IS doing something, it just means to do the thing you see as default).
When it all comes together, my guess as the low score on this would be that most of your points were roughly folk ethics without great justification (except for the point that being mean won’t help you convince others, which people probably already had an opinion on before you). I think the website is more bottom-up than that, preferring you to work out why the principle is good in non-obvious ways.
This little review isn’t my best work, but I thought it would be helpful if the author had at least a guess why the post was low scored rather than nothing.
I don’t know why this is scored below 0, but I also didn’t get a lot from this, so I would not normally vote it up or down.
I think you’ve come across something valuable for yourself though, the fact that the golden rule isn’t actually a moral theory that works very well without several caveats. Things like “I like blue so I should paint all of your stuff blue” are invalid and suggest the first addendum you noted: it should actually read “Treat others as they want to be treated”.
I think it is phrased how it is to add a hook in the user’s mind for empathy. The idiom is meant to remind you that others have experiences too. However, the principle, when adjusted for truthfulness, is basically “Treat other people nicely”, which is not catchy or really useful. I think perhaps this chain of thought was simple enough that it didn’t “pull up on” the score for your post.
I think you may have gotten pushback on much of the middle of the body as well, where I see points like “do nothing”, which some readers may recognize isn’t really an option (doing nothing IS doing something, it just means to do the thing you see as default).
When it all comes together, my guess as the low score on this would be that most of your points were roughly folk ethics without great justification (except for the point that being mean won’t help you convince others, which people probably already had an opinion on before you). I think the website is more bottom-up than that, preferring you to work out why the principle is good in non-obvious ways.
This little review isn’t my best work, but I thought it would be helpful if the author had at least a guess why the post was low scored rather than nothing.