Guide Lines

why it's hard to get kindness right

Looking back, the guidelines were pretty straightforward, if a bit regimented. First it was the concept of coloring within the lines in order to get the best crayon artwork. Another early one was following the directions when playing Candy Land. Later it was how to make upper and lower case letters, manuscript and cursive, using the Zaner-Bloser method.

There were tools and documents to remind us of the guidelines so we could all get really good at these activities of daily living.

Further schooling, living and working at adult jobs reinforced the value of following guidelines, but with more nuance and range. There are, for example:

• Nice-to-do’s (for instance, writing thank you notes for gifts received) and Need-to-do’s (like eating and sleeping); 

• Warnings (don’t use the toaster near water) and Laws (drive on the right); 

• Guidelines (“This Side Up”) and Requirements (pay the taxes you owe)

I want to focus here on one particular enterprise: being good and kind to others. It seems basic, and essential for life as a social species.

Some days there seem to be many more examples of what NOT to do than there are examples of HOW to do it well. Lots of examples of language intended to divide, offend, accuse, label, blame and vilify. But relatively few examples of living a life designed around an abiding kindness: assuming the best in others; seeking first to understand; being kind even when the other side is not. Kindness and service to others is espoused in many houses of worship. So what makes it so difficult to put into practice with some consistency?

I was a poll worker in the last election, so I spent some time in the halls of our local elementary school which served as the polling station. One feature struck me. Painted on the wall of a main thoroughfare, in a bright color and large block letters, were these phrases: “Take responsibility for your actions” and “Treat each other with respect and kindness.” 

These seem like important tenants to introduce at an early age, and to display prominently as an aspect of school culture, much like the long-touted Golden Rule: “Treat others the way you would like to be treated.” I thought it had its origins in the Bible (Luke 6:31 - And as you wish that others would do to you, do so to them), but a little research suggests that this idea has been around for thousands of years all over the place:

Do for one who may do for you, that you may cause him thus to do.
— Ancient Egyptian ‘Tale of the Eloquent Peasant,’ circa 1800 BCE

Do not do to others what angers you if done to you by others.
— Ancient Greek, Isocrates, circa 375 BCE

What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow. — Talmud, Shabbat 31a

Do not kill or injure your neighbor, for it is not him that you injure; you injure yourself.
— Shawnee proverb

So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them.
— Matthew 7:12

None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.
— Prophet Muhammad, Sahih al-Bukhari, Book 2, Hadith 12

Treat not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.
— Buddhist, Udanavarga 5:18

"Do not impose on others what you do not wish for yourself."
— Confucius, Analects 15:23

Why does this keep coming up? Something about this basic guideline for empathy, reciprocity and recognizing the dignity of others is at once ubiquitous in occurrence and elusive in practice. 

In any case, the guidance has proved useful so we keep running it through the cultural copier and leaving it under windshield wipers throughout human history like a flyer. “Don’t forget this great idea!”

This kind of moral guidance is associated with religious doctrine, but there are examples with more secular application. The 4-way Test, for example, was written by businessman Herbert J. Taylor in 1936, and adopted by Rotary International in 1940. My father was a devoted Rotarian, and I can see how The 4-way Test influenced his day-to-day manner. The idea is that, for anything you think, say or do, it is helpful to ask first:

1. Is it Truthful?

2. Is it fair to all concerned?

3. Will it build goodwill and better friendships?

4. Will it be beneficial to all concerned?

The implication is enormous: if something does not meet one or more of the criteria, don’t say it. Don’t act on it. If it checks all the boxes, consider it good to go.

It’s a tall order. Can you imagine a society (or a social medium) in which such a discipline was practiced more often?

Maybe the ability to follow this concept with any kind of rigor is not innate to our species. We have to be reminded.  

And we have to practice under different conditions. Not just when the return of kindness is assured, but during times that call for more kindness, more grace than we would think possible.

To paraphrase Luke (the line immediately after the “Golden Rule”): If I am good and kind to people who are good and kind to me, and only on days when the weather is fair…should I even get credit for that?

Maybe it’s time to “step up my game,” so to speak.

“Recognize yourself in others” © ChatGPT