Mind Mastery

Treat others as you wish to be treated. 

How do you want to be treated? 

With respect, dignity and consideration.

This is the golden rule of equity.

Equity being a word which means to be just and fair.

Taken a level deeper, just and fair appropriate to the context.

There are situations and contexts which at first may seem contradictory to this rule, but in fact are not.

If someone came over to you in a cafe and deliberately poured a hot cup of coffee over your laptop, without provocation or just cause, then you would be within your grounds to respond physically. 

One may think, I would not like to get punched in the face, so therefore I should treat others in the same way, thus not responding in a physically proportional manner.

Although if you were to reverse the situation and you had been the one to unjustifiably attack someones valuable private property, would you not find it reasonable that the victim punched you in the face in response to your initiated act of aggression?

One should of course first identify if the man who had poured coffee over their laptop was of sound mind, for they may well be a literal retard. In this case, responding physically would not be appropriate as a retard is not fully responsible for their actions. 

It is not to say that one should act by identifying if the laptop destroyer is mentally stable and then immediately punch the man in the face.

It is to say that it can be considered reasonable to behave in such a way, but not that it is the best methodology to utilise. 

It is to highlight that at times, the way you wish to be treated would be to be punched in the face, if you had done something to deserve it.

In that same situation, if you were a retard and had poured coffee over another's laptop, you would not want to be punched in the face for something you had little control over.

If someone accidentally hits the back of your car while driving, you should treat them the same way as if you had accidentally hit the back of someones car. This is equity, this is treating others as you wish to be treated.

If you were a bully and went around acting like a thug, intimidating people to reveal their private information, threatening to tie them up and kidnap them, then it would be reasonable for someone to respond with force against you.

This is because you are treating others in a way you would not wish to be treated. 

Use the police for example. If one is approached by the police and harassed, they can consider it from the opposite perspective.

If they were the police and were attempting to violate someone innocent, how would they deserve to be treated? They would acknowledge it would be perfectly reasonable, justifiable and deserving for them to be treated according to the context. 

If the police were harassing one who was innocent, then that man has the right to respond with force if necessary to be left in peace. Perhaps he should not for fear of consequence, but it does not change the fact he would be right to defend himself physically and he would not be violating the rule of equity, as he would be treating the police exactly the way he would wish to be treated if the roles were reversed and he was instead being a violent bully.

Equity is to treat others according to the context the same way you would wish to be treated.

If a teenager stole something from your store, you should not wish to respond physically by punching them in the face for stealing from you. You should want to apprehend them and then educate them as to why they should not steal. Perhaps you could even have them work at your store for a little while, then gift them with some appropriate item to show them that by working, they can have what they like by earning it, without needing to steal it.

Why should one do this? Because this is the way one would want to be treated if they were caught being a thief.

There is a difference between what you want to do and what you should do.

You may want to retaliate to particular inflammatory acts in an aggressive manner. Just because there is cause to do so, does not mean that one should do so.

If you discovered someone had sold you a dodgy car, one where the odometer was rolled back by 100,000ks and there was a whole host of issues which were denied when asked when you bought the car, you may feel entirely justified in responding violently to a lying crook. This does not mean that it is the best thing to do or that you should do it. 

The golden rule of equity, along with Objective Morality as a totality, requires the use of escalating force.

If you can achieve your results with words, then do so. If not, then force can be used which is equal and appropriate to the situation.

If a passenger on a plane is trying to kick down the pilots door, you should not immediately punch him in the throat with a kill shot because you felt that his actions were going to kill everyone on the plane. One should first attempt to use their words to de-escalate the situation by telling him to calm down and stop. The man may be drunk, having a psychosis or be on drugs. There are many reasons for why he may be acting so irrational, so words are always the first go to if the threat is not absolutely imminent.

If he did not stop kicking the pilots door after you used words, then you have legitimate grounds to use physical force to pull him away, put him on the ground and to try and restrain him. You should not throw him on the ground and punch him in the face multiple times. This would only be justifiable if you could not contain him without applying more force and if he was hitting you first.

This is appropriate action according to equity because if the situations were reversed, you would expect the same to happen to you.

Equity is what is just and fair according to the circumstances of how you wish to be treated, in alignment with your power to act.

If four armed cartel members busted into your home with guns aimed at your face, there is not much you can do. 

If you were holding a gun, you do have the right to shoot them as they have invaded your private property, caused damage and are armed with deadly weapons aimed to kill. 

You may ultimately believe that these traumatized and misguided thugs deserve to be rehabilitated and helped, but this is not in your power to do at this moment. 

If you were superman or James Bond, you could disarm all 4 gang members, tie them up and fly them to a rehab centre to get better. 

Even if you are a super hero, the proper correctional facilities would have to exist to do this, which most often they do not. One can only have so much power even if they are super powered or highly skilled. 

Since we can't be supermen, we can rule out having bullets bounce of our chest and calmly pulling the weapons out of the thugs hands.

The best we could become would be a "James Bond" level of ability. Even the most skilled combat expert in the world would not be able to or would have great difficulty disarming all four assailants without harming or killing any of them.

Even if it was ones highest desire to treat them exactly as one would wish to be treated and one was very tolerant of wrong behaviour, unless you have the power to act in a way which allows you to treat others exactly the way you want, then you have to compromise and treat them the best that you can in the context.

James Bond may wish to disarm the thugs without harming them before taking them to rehab. But even he cannot physically achieve this.

Even if you had the worlds best communication expert, there are cases where some people cannot be talked down.

The best James Bond may be able to do is shoot them all in the arms and legs, thus disabling them enough so he can remove their weapons, call an ambulance and have them taken to hospital, where they can then hopefully be transferred to an arbitration center, have an immediate trial, be found liable, then sent to rehab to heal their mental wounds which caused them to act so badly. 

Even this case is highly improbable, it may be achievable in the movies, but not in real life.

In real life, one may have to hold their hands up in surrender and allow the thugs to do as they please with them. Or if they wanted to fight, which would be their right, throw a grenade and blow them all up. 

One can only treat others as they wish to be treated according to the context and their power to do so. One can only do the best they can with the power, knowledge and experience they have.

If one would not like to be on the end of a misleading marketing tactic such as FREE ITEM, then later discover it is not free but XX amount of $$$ then they should not instigate the same type of marketing tactic.

When one acts in a consistently fair and reliable way, treating others as best they can to the same standard they wish to be treated, then one is being equitable.

The rule of equity is to emphasize that one should always strive to do their best to treat others in a just and non-contradictory way.