But responding to malice in kind is not always the right option. It is usually only the correct choice when the malicious person has no potential to change. Responding to a badly behaved teen with poor treatment only exacerbates the problem. On the other hand, responding to an oligarch with firm resistance would be the right choice.
The oligarch wants to be treated harshly because that is their core value by which they think the world operates, while the teen is often acting in a defensive posture to avoid harm to themselves and would respond to a more gentle hand.
I think the oligarch wants to be treated with riches and subservience.
And if a teen is bullying someone, I don’t see the issue in them being bullied back so they can learn “hey, this bullying stuff isn’t great, maybe I should stop”.
Except OPs rule would essentially be identical.
When you see someone “treating others as they want to be treated” than that is what you’d do to them. Hence following that rule when it is deserved.
But unlike with “treat others as they want to be treated”, OPs version would mean you respond to malice in kind.
But responding to malice in kind is not always the right option. It is usually only the correct choice when the malicious person has no potential to change. Responding to a badly behaved teen with poor treatment only exacerbates the problem. On the other hand, responding to an oligarch with firm resistance would be the right choice.
The oligarch wants to be treated harshly because that is their core value by which they think the world operates, while the teen is often acting in a defensive posture to avoid harm to themselves and would respond to a more gentle hand.
I think the oligarch wants to be treated with riches and subservience.
And if a teen is bullying someone, I don’t see the issue in them being bullied back so they can learn “hey, this bullying stuff isn’t great, maybe I should stop”.