Beloved Spear, that's exactly right—because our tendency is to be self-centered, we're likely to take a great maxim like the Golden Rule and muck it up. And I agree with this, too: "It’s that relationship-building that makes the love ethic so radically healing and transformative." The problem is that we can't always take the time (or we might not have the opportunity) to get to know every person we pass on the sidewalk or in the line at the grocery store. And with some people—even friends and co-workers—we might not have much luck getting into their mind and hearts, no matter how hard we try. We're left to fill in the blanks. As adults, we have a broader perspective to draw from, but it's easy for kids to assume every family and each mind and heart are like theirs. (And yes—getting to know people who are radically different is SO important. My previous post is about that, in many ways.) 

Regarding a right way/wrong way approach, I think I wasn't clear enough in this sentence: "It’s not about a right way or a wrong way. It’s just about different ways." I'm not saying there is no right or wrong way to treat people—certainly there is. What I'm saying is there's no right or wrong way to *be* as a human being. One person was created with a more logical mind, another is more intuitive; one is extroverted to the core, another is introverted. No person is more right or wrong than another, as long as they are being the person they were created to be. Does that make sense? Is there still "moral ambiguity?"

xmartinj, very true—we can only fully express empathy if we know the person we are interacting with. But then I run into the same problem I explained to Beloved Spear, above: We simply can't know everyone in that real way. If my kids see someone who is homeless, is empathy not important (or even impossible) because they don't have the opportunity to get to know every homeless person we see? Or do I still ask "how do you think you would feel?" Your nuanced explanation (“How does that make him/her feel?â€ and then “Would you like him/her to make you feel that way?â€) is great, I think, and reinforces how we often present the Golden Rule in a flawed way. :)

ed, yes, it can be shocking, when your motives are pure and you're trying to make something better, not worse. That describes much of my first marriage, actually. My ex-husband and I were wired completely differently. Not only did we have a hard time understanding each other, but we fell into that "my approach is clearly better" trap. If I had learned about "difference" the way I describe in this post, it would have helped a lot, I think.

Maureen, I'm so glad you shared that link. What an important document and way to view others. I do think compassion is the key to a better world.

Sara, this is interesting: I think I've done a lot to help my kids understand many of the more visible/obvious differences in the world (regarding ethnicity, religious belief, etc.), but I haven't done such a great job talking to them about how their school friends and even their sisters—who seem just like them on the surface—are different from them. That's what I'm hoping will start to shift with my new approach to the Golden Rule.

Jessica, yes, even biological sisters raised in the same family can see the world in very different ways. :) But think of it this way: Your life might be more emotionally exhausting, but by being empathetic, you are probably having an important impact on many people in your life. I hope you can embrace and love that part of who you are!