Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
I think that then we would not have separated from the world around us and would have lived in an animal way. It was the unequal nature of exchanges that allowed the human species to become dominant and the Anthropocene came.
In different formulations, it is found in different cultures. But there it often has a limited effect and applies only to members of this cultural community. Outsiders are treated without any ethics, as well as those who decide to apply this rule to an outsider.
Due to the globalization of processes and the mixing of cultures, it has recently become possible to extend the effect of this rule to all of humanity as a whole.
However, in the long run, this is not a good idea because it leads to a reduction in species diversity, but now in the field of culture. The decline in species diversity slows down evolutionary processes and threatens the existence of cultural life and life in general.
On a limited scale, the golden rule works as a relationship damper, preventing overreactions to each other. Supports the integrity of the social group. On a global scale, it will slow down evolution.
The balance is important.