Bob
Fiske
Reciprocity – Like Water to Fish, Part Two
CLICK HERE to go to Part One.
Deep Values. Let us propose that not all values are
equal. Some values may be woven so
tightly and deeply into the fabric of a culture that they are held by virtually
every person who has grown up in that culture.
Deep values of this type are so common that I compare them to the water
in which fish swim. Do fish notice that
they are constantly surrounded by water?
Similarly, how often does a person in our society notice he or she is
guided by a deep value? Not only that,
but the rare person who goes even farther and dares to question whether a
certain deep value is good or necessary may be regarded as crazy or
threatening.
Now, some fish may be in a position that allows them to
become aware of the water. (Think of
flying fish or trout leaping at bugs buzzing over the pond.) By the same token, some people may be in a
position to recognize a deep value in their culture long before the majority of
that culture’s inhabitants do. Perhaps
that person is forced by a quirk of history to inhabit a social niche in which that
value is not such a certainty.
Or, recognition of the deep value might occur because it has
negative consequences. This can happen
if “the system” is already in a grotesque state of imbalance. An imbalanced system is in a state of stress,
therefore, negative consequences can add to that stress. If so, then it becomes harder and harder to
ignore the damage that a deep value is doing.
(By way of analogy, imagine a cracked fishbowl in which fewer and fewer
fish can rely on the presence of water.
In this stressed system, all the fish become aware of water.)
I now wish to discuss one of these deep values,
reciprocity. This value has been central
to civilizations for thousands of years.
It must have occupied an important place in the social structure to have
not been displaced. Yet, modern society
has pushed this value to such ridiculous extremes that terrible consequences
are unfolding. Later, I will discuss an
alternative to reciprocity and why that alternative’s importance should be
elevated.
What is
Reciprocity? Reciprocity is an
important type of value, the type that we use to evaluate the worth of things
and actions. We also use it to regulate
our use of another precious commodity: time.
Reciprocity—this sounds like I’m using a fifty dollar word
where a fifty cent word would suffice.
Well, I’ve been known to do that…
Let’s see if some related phrases can clue us in to the idea: return on
investment, payoff, fair trade, good deal, not ripped off, equitable
business transaction. Reciprocity has to
do with fair exchanges, and that idea has been with us for millennia.
I believe that ever since people recognized opportunities to
exchange things—call it what you will, barter, trade, exchange of goods and
services—they were confronted by the issue of fairness. Why even children show a propensity to think
this way. There is an underlying concern
about being taken advantage of, or giving away more than you’re getting in
exchange. In fact, I find it plausible
that the institution of monetary currencies owes its existence to this concern
about fair exchanges.
And why does this concern exist? Because it is natural and tempting for a
person to want to maximize his or her resources, even if this means that a
trading partner ends up with less than a fair share. (By the way, there are interesting
similarities in biology. Nature learned
to deal with these issues long before
the thinking brain appeared on the scene.)
Think of the business person or the private investor. It is “natural” to want to maximize your
return on investment or to leverage your profit. Why, it is simply a case of efficiency, of doing more with
less, and who could question that? When
a deal profits us, do we question that?
Does it occur to us that our good fortune might be a distortion
of true fairness, or reciprocity?
In an earlier age, the earth appeared to have plenty of
everything humans needed (space, water, resources, labor). Therefore it was easy to accept the
efficiency of maximizing return without regard to what might be happening on
the side that you weren’t
inhabiting. But as the human population
approached and crossed the three-billion mark, the system began to display
strain. Hence the concern of a few
individuals to come together in the Club of Rome.
I believe that right now it is much easier to question the
value of maximizing “payoff”. Why? Because the earth is crowded with seven
billion of us (and growing). Every
negative effect of a deep value is multiplied many billions of times.
Summary of Part
One. Some values are “deep
values”. They are woven tightly into the
culture and are held by virtually every person.
But deep values are hard to recognize unless the system is in gross
imbalance. This essay focuses on the deep
value known as reciprocity. Although
reciprocity suggests the idea of fair exchanges, it is usually modified by the
natural human tendency to maximize payoff.
Some people justify this as efficiency, or doing more with less. Our huge human population is causing this
distortion of reciprocity to deliver more and more damage to the world system
in which we live.
CLICK HERE to go to Part Three.
