The Golden Rule-'do to others as you would have them do to you', 'what is hateful to you to your fellow don't do', to take the two most familiar formulations-defines a meeting place for many fields of learning. There the study of comparative religion, philosophy and ethics, anthropology and sociology, and the whole range of cross-cultural studies carried on in the social sciences and the humanities intersect. That hardly presents a surprise, since the Golden Rule finds a place in most religions and is universally acknowledged to form a part of the shared heritage of human wisdom. But if it is one thing on which religions concur, that does not mean the Golden Rule is simple or self-evident. Its ubiquity presents us with tough questions of context and difficult problems of content. Both the Golden Rule itself and how it attests to the human condition demand study. Defining the rule and explaining its universality in religion and culture require attention. The role of the Golden Rule in various systems of thought, both religious and philosophical, invites study. How the logic of a given system interprets the Golden Rule demands analysis. Objective data deriving from empirical study of nature and society deserve close examination. Specialists in a wide range of disciplines have a contribution to make out of their particular disciplines and areas of expert knowledge.

In an age plagued by selfishness, materialism, and violence, ethicists feel impelled to find a universal system of values. To arrive at such a "rule" requires that they struggle with a series of seemingly irreconcilable questions. First, are universal values possible in a pluralistic world, and how does one do justice to both human equality and to individual and cultural differences? How is one to understand the interface between religious moral teachings and the ethics of secular humanism? Finally, can such a system integrate moral intuition and moral reason? In the first scholarly book in English on the golden rule since the seventeenth century, Jeffrey Wattles demonstrates how a clear understanding of the psychological, philosophical, and religious ramifications of the rule can form the synthesis needed to solve these dilemas.
The golden rule, "do to others as you would have others do to you," is widely assumed to have a single meaning, shared by virtually all the world's religions. It strikes the average person as intuitively true, though most modern philosophers reject it or recast it in more rational form. Wattles surveys the history of the golden rule and its spectrum of meanings in diverse contexts, ranging from Confusius to Plato and Aristotle, from classical Jewish literature to the New Testament. He also considers medieval, Reformation, and modern theological and philosophical responses and objections to the rule, as well as how some early twentieth-century American leaders have tried to use the rule. Wattles draws these diverse interpretation into a synthesis that responds, at the psychological, philosophical, and religious levels, to the challenges to moral living in any given culture. Emotionally, the rules counsels consideration for others feelings by asking that "you place yourself in their shoes." Intellectually, it activates moral thinking about what is fair. At the same time, it retains a spiritual appeal as "the principle of the practice of the family of God."
Demonstrating how, despite its contentious history, this age-old ethical principle contiues to be relevant in dealing with contemporary issues, The Golden Rule should interest students and scholars working in religious studies, philosophy and ethics, and psychology, as well as anyone looking for an alternative to postmodern cynicism and alienation.