Timothy Wilken
In yesterday’s description of the Gift Tensegrity, I wrote:
As a giftor, I want to give away all I can. I want to give away all those things that I don’t need. I want to help as many individuals as I can. But, only I know what I don’t need and what I have to give. Therefore control of gifting remains in the hands of the giftor.
Social scientist and educator Bill Ellis writes: “The “I” in the above comment shows a misunderstanding of how reciprocity of gifting has worked in other cultures. The purpose of giving is to increase the well being of the whole culture and thereby of oneself. The mindset is that I as an individual cannot be any better off than is my community.
I agree completely with your point. In the gifting tensegrity, the giftor maximizes his earned trust and respect by helping the whole community to the best of his ability. He comes to understand that he and his community are one. That which benefits community also benefits the individual. That’s why I said that the “ideal” giftor wants to give away all that he can. He wants to give away all those things that he doesn’t need. He wants to help as many members of his community as he can.
But a major difference of the Gift Tensegrity is that control of what, when and to whom he gifts remains solely with the giftor. Synergism is not communism. This is not “from those according to their abilities to those according to their needs“. Within the Gift Tensegrity, another’s needs make no claim on my abilities. I may choose to gift to other or not. Yes, the values of community and mores of a gifting tensegrity community would support and celebrate the most generous of members. Those that gift the most will rightfully earn the most trust and respect. But the transaction is always a gift, it is never an obligation. It must always be freely given.
This is the real point of my words. Those with ability cannot be slaves to the needs of less fortunate or able. Slavery is adversity regardless of the nobility of the ends used to justify it. The less fortunate and less able within community will be helped, but those helping will not be coerced.
“Altruism plays little role in most reciprocity cultures. The well-being of everything on which “I” am dependent is what drives the systems.
Again, I agree. My gifts to community are not selfless. I am earning trust and respect. In synergic community, trust and respect brings me security and support. I know I am interdependent. I know I need others to survive. And, certainly the most enlightened of members will know and understand this. But the power of the Gift Tensegrity mechanism is that the process itself is synergic. If you follow the process, all relationships are synergic. It requires no understanding of enlightenment for proper behavior. The rules of the GT allow only synergic behavior.
“In the more modern “Gaian Paradigm” the basic need to “belong” comes into play. We give of ourselves in order to “belong” to communities. The motivation is gaining public respect.
This is an important point. In my next revision of the descriptions of the GT, I will address belonging more explicitly. Thanks.
“The Dominator Paradigm, on which the EuroAmerican culture is amost uniquely based, makes material accumulation the most significant part of that motivation for many, if not most, people. The economists’ “homoeconemicus” has self-interest and materialism as the only motivation. In fact, as is becoming obvious to all, self-interest is not our only motivation. In fact, it is often a negative. Super wealth does not bring universal respect, particularly when that wealth is not earned by being productive.
Good point Bill, as you so clearly point out today’s Golden Rule is: He who has the “gold” rules. We may not respect him, but we will still do pretty much whatever he pays us to do.
“Although the physical act of giving may remain in the hands of the giftor, the social motivation, and peer pressure, can make giving a necessity for living a good life.”
I agree completely. But, the physical act of giving must remain in the hands of the giftor to prevent the giftor from becoming the slave to those in need. Thanks Bill, for your thoughtful and intelligent comments.
Timothy Wilken