Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E who wrote (60229)	9/27/2002 8:43:43 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

Do you consider a spirit of reciprocity, as a principle--a generic concept--a human 'duty,' (as in behavior driven by ethical principle or precepts), or do you consider it an unnecessary nicety, or as irrelevant, in human social systems? I'm not sure what you mean by a spirit of reciprocity. That would mean that if you are mean to me, I should be mean back. But I don't think that's what you intended to say. We were really on the issue of apologies and excuses. I do not conisder them a duty or obligation. I don't think a person commits a sin, or a serious offense against society of a gravity that challenges the stability or legitimacy of society, if they don't apologize for being late. But I think it is something more than irrelevant. it's not a necessary nicety, but it is definitely a nicety. And where one person wants to establish or continue a good relationship with another, it tends to help that to offer an apology. So to that regard, it can be in the apologizer's best interests. How important is the principle of reciprocity in informing human interaction, do you think? That's a complex question. If what you mean is, you scratch my back and I'll scratch yours, I think it's very useful for getting what you want out of life. But most of our society is hierarchial, and there reciprocity is inappropriate. I go before a judge of whom I make requests and who gives me rulings. There is no reciprocity there. She tells me what is going to happen, I can't tell her much of anything. I ask, she order. Similarly, in parent-child relationships, boss-employee, coach-player, a principle of reciprocity would be not only irrelevant but destructive of the relationship. And in the military, expecting reciprocity or making an issue of it, or getting your back up when the sargeant yells at you or expecting apologies and explanations can kill people What do you think about the Golden Rule? Is it a choice, or a duty? Well, certainly not a duty. Policemen give people tickets, but they surely don't want tickets given to them. Soldiers kill the enemy, but sure as hell hope the enemy doesn't kill them. Given your options, more a choice. But really, it's more in the order of a recommendation for, in certain circumstances, for getting other people to like you.