An important facet of relationship is transaction, but the converse also holds:transaction implies some relationship. We can approach this from the relationships side and move into economic aspects or vice versa, but we follow Offer in starting from the economics side.
At the commencement of his chapter on regard, Offer draws our attention to the predominance of markets in economic discussions, ever since Adam Smith, widely cited as the father of modern economics, made a key assertion that every individual seeks his own advantage, with no regard for the welfare of others.1 Offer also cites Karl Polanyi who posited that economies have been transformed from socially embedded reciprocity to impersonal price-driven market exchange. Yet, as Offer subsequently illustrates, non-market exchange is still actually quite vibrant – as gifts (organs, charity contributions, bequests, etc.)2. These are still very substantial examples that highlight relationship and in most cases involve reciprocity, leading Offer to make the claim that non-market exchange is a viable alternative to the market system.
From the economic point of view, the likes of Facebook and LinkedIn may be viewed as commercial enterprises based very much on the market system, yet within this there are many personal interactions. The process of joining the stock market has highlighted the growing tension between these and we argue that personal interaction has suffered badly as a result. Safeguarding the quality of such interaction is paramount for Sigala, so as an initial step we follow Offer’s lead to assert that SNS may be based mainly on non-market transactions, on transactions that are non-monetary and directly concerned with the people involved.
Gift Culture
The main driver for such a non-monetary economy is the gift culture. As Offer indicates, the gift culture is much in evidence in the economy. If we consider the online context, we find a range of examples such as the The Good Life for All: The Sunshine Bank3, which pays credits for good deeds…
“Make friends and recognise them for their positive actions. You can make friends on the Sunshine Bank – these are called ‘Rays’ – and choose to gift your Lumins to them in recognition of their positive actions.
Gift culture is well known among proponents of free and open source software, in which there are no monetary returns for the software itself. Thus such software may be seen as directly contradicting Adam Smith, as summarised by a journalist in this field:
A “gift economy” is a social system in which status is given by how much one shares or gives to one’s community, as opposed to an “exchange economy” where status is given to those who own or control the most stuff. In today’s world we’re used to the latter economic philosophy, as it has been closely affiliated with the capitalist system since at least the Industrial Revolution and the invention of the corporation. But the Industrial Age is over — this is the Information Age now, and things are changing.
Jem Matzan, The gift economy and free software http://archive09.linux.com/feature/36554
These sentiments expressed by Matzan were given earlier expression in an influential collection of essays by Eric S. Raymond, called ‘The Cathedral and the Bazaar4, which has been credited with persuading Netscape to release their code as open source, leading to the popular Mozilla products such as Firefox. Another example of such sharing is Creative Commons (http://creativecommons.org/), which is the name of an organisation and open licensing scheme, allowing works to be shared and modified without monetary cost.
It should be emphasized that this is a global phenomenon that permeates the commercial as well as non-commercial world, so it merits study for discerning how it is that it can work so successfully; it is not merely relevant for Sigala because an SNS is software. Raymond’s work is distinctive in its attempts to explore some of the more sociological issues. Among his essays is ‘Homesteading the Noosphere,’ which provides insights into the motives for software developers with regard to gift culture and ownership5. As to the question of what these developers seek, Raymond talks about prestige, a notion that is associated with reputation and status. These are some of the core aspects to be found in Offer’s notion of regard and some of Raymond’s other discussion develops along similar lines of thought6. Certainly, with Creative Commons we can see regard is intrinsic in that works are generally attributed to the original authors.
However, overall, the ideas expressed by Raymond are confined to a specific community and content and thus somewhat narrower in scope. More fundamentally, underlying Raymond’s thesis itself is the assumption that there’s a motive of acquisition, analogous to land rights and hence the title. Such an assumption may not apply for regard.
Regard: Personal, Impersonal and beyond
One of the main reasons we have chosen to focus on Offer’s economy of regard is that it identifies and illuminates the importance of authentication in human relationships, with regard being a conscious mechanism that operates in such authentication and is given freely and voluntarily.
Regard requires an element of reciprocity, highlighting mutuality where it exists, whilst also allowing this relationship to be asymmetrical in quantity and quality; thus an important distinction is made between regard and pseudo regard, the latter manifesting as semblances involving no conscious effort from another person. Its significance for Sigala is immediate as it is especially useful in measuring the status and depth of a relationship. In this model a sequence of transactions can also suggest a direction and flow associated with regard itself, thereby opening up meta-relational aspects.
Offer characterises transactions as either personal or impersonal, with motivations described as rooted in desire, desire for regard. There are, however, significant unknowns, especially surrounding the quantification; the incompleteness is acknowledged and illustrated through some examples that imply other motives at work. The scale of unpredictability in human behaviour strongly suggests that these unseen motives are important and even more so from the perspective of someone pursuing a religious or spiritual path.
Merit in Gift Culture
Such perspectives underlie why notions of giving and their significances vary a great deal and so we return now to consider gift culture in that light to extend the perspectives described by Offer. Giving and gifts feature prominently in Buddhism; insofar as they are carried out with skilful intention they are generally regarded as positives. If there is a sense of debt or burden, it might be expressed in terms such as “children are unable to return the debt of kindness that their parents have shown in bringing them into the world and nurturing them.” There is one exception and that is the gift of Dharma7,a hint of action beyond the material that may be classified as transpersonal.
Generally in Buddhism giving can be regarded as an act of perfection that creates puñña (alternatively written punnya), which is usually translated as ‘merit’ or ‘good deed’, which is said to accumulate, i.e. it has the property of storage. It is also regarded as providing a basis for wish fulfilment – although non-monetary it has an analogous effect to the way money provides resources that open up opportunities. Furthermore puñña is said to grow and spread as it is personally shared since even receiving news of someone else’s good deeds may well have a positive effect when acknowledged– as captured by the phrase anumodāna puñña (rejoicing in the merit!)
There are some trans-personal aspects involved. For instance, the recipients are not always the ones who have to pay back. A monk on pindapata, the traditional morning almsround, may open their bowl for food, keeping the attention focused on the bowl, close the lid and walk on. In some cases there is no eye contact. However, the monks may chant a blessing. If a lay person donates to an arahant, who are beyond creating karma, the gift culture here is a conditionality that arahants have transcended. Yet, the donor receives great merit.
Puñña is thus a very important individual and collective driver for gift culture in many Asian countries, particularly in oriental countries. In some of the larger religious communities, the supporters create circles of virtue, encouraging each other in generosity. The personal reinforcement involves significant mutuality and trust and a natural spinoff of such activity is the closer engagement in other economic activities. Puñña is significant enough to merit special consideration in the design of Sigala, at least in the cultural layers.
Thus we should support such noble motives and conduct in SNS and recognise that there may be factors that go beyond the context of 1-1 personal relationships. A Buddhist monk in the Theravadin tradition explains that when a member of the monastic community is presented with a gift, it should be received on behalf of the Sangha, so that the donor receives the maximum merit.8 The response to signify this is “Sadhu” or, as given above,”I rejoice in your merit.” If instead the monk says ‘thank you’ this turns it into a personal gift9. This implies there is impersonal, personal and transcendent, which in this context means leading to escape from Samsara.
The discussion above points to a tertium quid lying beyond personal and impersonal that we should try to accommodate in Sigala. To do this properly requires understanding across the various religious and cultural traditions, which needs input from other academic and non-academic approaches – particularly in the spheres of philosophy, religion and spirituality. All this is obviously beyond the scope of a few research papers, but we may at least make a start with Buddhism. Here we observe that punnya is enduring and furthermore its continued cultivation helps in the long-term development of paramis (perfections), said to be the quality of a noble human being. The canonical literature of Theravada Buddhism lists 10 paramis: dana, sila, nekhamma, sacca, viriya, khanti, panya, adhitthana, metta, and upekkha10. Yet these are not material acquisitions. So where spiritual practice such as the pursuit of paramis becomes increasingly central to one’s life, their external observation (and measurement) may become increasingly difficult.
These are brie fillustrations to show that such beliefs and customs are important to understand the kinds of motives in human transaction, especially in giving; they are certainly not confined to material monetary considerations. As such SNS should take some account of them.
We next look at some of the more operational requirements in … economic transaction.
Notes
1 Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Cause of the Wealth of Nations, Volume 2, pp. 269-270. Available from Google books at: http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=l94_AAAAcAAJ
2 Offer later cites estimated contributions from non-market activities (housework) as having generally kept up with GNP (p.86).
3 The Sunshine bank http://www.sunshinebank.co.uk/ (archived). Also described at: http://www.thegoodlifeforall.com/the-sunshine-bank/ (archived).
4 Eric S. Raymond, Epilog: Netscape Embraces the Bazaar, http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s13.html
5 Eric S. Raymond, Homesteading the Noosphere, http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/homesteading/
6 Motivations for
open source software development have been explored
in relation to the economy of regard (and providing
some evidence for its validity) in: Jean-Michel
Dalle, Paul A. David, Rishab Aiyer Ghosh, Frank
A.Wolak. 2004 Free & Open Source Software
Creation and ‘the Economy of Regard’ Third
EPIP Workshop: “What Motivates Inventors to Invent?”
Convened at Scuola Superiore Sant’Anna, Pisa, Italy,
2-3 April 2004. Also delivered at the Oxford
Internet Institute in June 2004. Paper:
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/238546546_Free_open_source_software_creation_and_%27the_economy_of_regard%27
Slides: https://www.oii.ox.ac.uk/archive/downloads/research/fiveowlsgohoot/postevent/David_OWLS_slides-blk.pdf
7 Tripitaka
Dhammapada verse 354. Many translations and
explanations are available. See e.g.
http://www.tipitaka.net/tipitaka/dhp/verseload.php?verse=354
8 This view is
explained in Monks Rules with Bhante Vimalaramsi
– Why Monks don’t say Thank you:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s03XpZlOGYM
9 A daily example is monks on pindapata, the traditional morning almsround. Monks may reveal their bowl for food, keeping their attention focused on the bowl, close the lid and then walk on. There is no “thank you”, though the monks may chant a blessing. The reason for this is that it is by accepting the food, the monk already accepts the donation on behalf of the Sangha, which is considered most meritorious.
10 For a discussion
of the paramis see e.g. The Ten
Perfections A Study Guide by Thanissaro
Bhikkhu
http://www.accesstoinsight.org/lib/study/perfections.html