Re: [ox-en] "The science of persuasion"
- From: Casimir Purzelbaum <quasi utopix.net>
- Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 22:33:49 +0100
* Ref.: »Re: [ox-en] "The science of persuasion"«
* Per I. Mathisen (2004-02-27 19:41)
Hi Per,
Thanks for the quote!
From context of the article. The dictionary meaning I think is
used is this:
"2. Done by each to the other; interchanging or interchanged;
given and received; due from each to each; mutual; as,
reciprocal love; reciprocal duties. ... Usage: Reciprocal,
Mutual. The distinctive idea of mutual is, that the parties
unite by interchange in the same act; as, a mutual covenant;
mutual affection, etc. The distinctive idea of reciprocal is,
that one party acts by way of return or response to something
previously done by the other party; as, a reciprocal kindness;
reciprocal reproaches, etc. Love is reciprocal when the
previous affection of one party has drawn forth the attachment
of the other. To make it mutual in the strictest sense, the two
parties should have fallen in love at the same time; but as the
result is the same, the two words are here used
interchangeably. The ebbing and flowing of the tide is a case
where the action is reciprocal, but not mutual." (Webster's
Revised Unabridged Dictionary)
Hope this clears up any confusion.
This is a much better description than I could have given!
Still, it matches how I understand the term (-- I think ;-).
That is to say, with this understanding of reciprocity my
original questions are still open, eg.
How do you conclude reciprocal meant "not forced" and "based
on voluntary giving of gifts"?
"Not forced" or "voluntary" seems to just mean: not enforced by
visible application of force (violence) but rather by "a norm
that obligates individuals to repay in kind what they have
received." (Quote from article).
(The explanation you quoted seems to put "mutual" in line with
"exchange" and "reciprocal" in line with "credit"...?)
But this is exactly the aspect that I don't like -- even if it
were true for the whole period of class societies. Still I
venture to ask whether there has ever been the criterion for a
society to exist or to be a community. As an example: is it not
almost impossible (in most cases) to reciprocally "repay"
education "in kind"? Hasn't it been an advantageous idea to start
educating the people regardless of their ability to repay this
back in whatever service they could render to the economy? I
think there are many cases where you can *find* reciprocity only
after the fact, not as their primary motivation, or as the
guiding norm. In other words: I don't doubt, that some reflection
of reciprocity can be bolted onto pretty much every imagineable
relationship -- however, it seems also plain that you can find
non-reciprocity as often as that. E.g. research & development in
any area have to have a very far reaching concept of reciprocity
in order to be far-reaching. I might as well call this
non-reciprocal to a certain extent. Maybe FS would develop faster
if everybody who uses a certain piece of free SW would be obliged
to repay in kind. At the same time the scope of this development
would be much narrower, wouldn't it?
The danger I see in the reciprocity principle is that, if
"individuals are obliged to repay", you tend not to bother about
individuals that cannot be expected to repay... That would mean,
a reciprocity-based system is internally less "fault-tolerant",
and stronger to the outside for exactly that reason.
Far-reaching perspective, however, assumes "fault"-tolerance
within the system -- at the expense of external strength
(competitiveness).
Hm. I'm not sure if I could make my confusion clearer ;-}
Regards,
Casi.
p.s. I do have the suspicion that I'm still far of the theses of
the article. But so far I have always been disappointed with the
Scientific American, especially regarding their ideological
assumptions (-- they don't even seem to realise that they have
some and that these do influence their "scientific" thought). So
I'm probably not going to spend money on it... Is the article
available online?
_________________________________
Web-Site: http://www.oekonux.org/
Organization: projekt oekonux.de