What Is Reciprocity?
The Silver Rule (Presumption of Inequality)
In the Negative (Silver Rule, or via-negativa): The requirement to avoid the imposition of costs on that which others have born costs to obtain an interest in, without imposing costs upon that which others have likewise born costs to obtain an interest in.
And;
The Golden Rule (Presumption of Equality)
In the Positive(Golden Rule, or via-positiva): the requirement that we limit our actions to productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfers, free of the imposition of costs by externality, upon that which others have obtained by the same means.
As determined by;
Either any change, or the total change, in the inventory that all parties both internal and external to the action have born costs to obtain an interest in, without imposition of costs upon others directly or indirectly by externality.
Why Does Reciprocity Serve as Natural Law?
Because it is apparently impossible to contradict reciprocity in cooperation (ethics), and as such it provides perfect decidability in all contexts of cooperation at all scales in all times, and under all conditions. That’s what the words moral and ethical mean: “reciprocity”.
Where a Demonstrated Interest consists of:
- (I) Existential Interests, and (II) Obtained Interests:
Where;
Existential Interests Include:
1. Self: Life, Body, Genes, Memories, Mind, Attention Time, and Action
2. Opportunity for Action, Stimulation, Experience.
3. Status and Class (reputation, honor): Self-Image, Status, Reputation Social, Sexual, Economic, Political, and Military Market Value
4. Kith and Kin and Interpersonal (Relationship) Interests: Mates (access to sex/reproduction), and Marriage Children (genetic reproduction)
Consanguineous Relations (family, kin, clan, tribal and national relations)
5. Sustainable Patterns of Association, Cooperation, Insurance, Reproduction, Production, Distribution and Trade: Friends, Acquaintances, Neighbors, Cooperative Relations, Commercial Relations, Political Relations, and Military Relations.
And Obtained Interests:
Where;
Obtained Interest refers to Interests that are obtained by bearing a cost of opportunity, time, effort, resources, to obtain that interest without imposing upon the previously born costs of others.
And Where
Obtained Interests Include:
6. Several (Personal) Interests
Personal property: “Things an individual has a Monopoly Of Control over the use of.” Physical Body and Several Property: Those things we claim a monopoly of control over.
7. Shareholder (Fractional) Interests
Shares in property: Recorded And Quantified Shareholder Property (claims for partial ownership)
8. Title Interests (Weights and Measures)
Trademarks and Brands (prohibitions on fraudulent transfers within a geography).
9. Artificial Interests (Privileges)
Letters of Marque, Patents, Copyrights, Grants of License.
10. Common Interests, or “Commons” (Community Property)
Institutional Property: “Those objects into which we have invested our forgone opportunities, our efforts, or our material assets, in order to aggregate capital from multiple individuals for mutual gain.”
(i) Informational commons: knowledge. Information.
(ii) Informal (Normative) Institutions: Our norms: habits, manners, ethics and morals. Informal institutional property is nearly impossible to quantify and price. The costs are subjective and consist of forgone opportunities.
(iii) Formal (Physical) Commons: the territory, it’s waterways, parks, buildings, improvements and infrastructure.
(iv) Formal (Procedural) Institutions: Our institutions: Religion, Education, Banking, Treasury, Government, Laws, Courts.
(v) Monuments (art and artifacts).
Monuments claim territory, demonstrate wealth, and provide one of the longest most invariable normative and economic returns that any culture can construct as a demonstration of conspicuous production (wealth), and as such, conspicuous excellence. (hence why competing monuments represent an invasion. Temples, Churches, Museums, Sculptures being the most obvious examples of cultural claim or conquest. )
(vi) Common Opportunity Interests
When people come together in proximity, and suppress impositions of costs upon the interests of others through the incremental evolution of the law of reciprocity, they decrease the time and effort required to produce voluntary association, cooperation and exchange. As such polities decrease opportunity costs, and generate opportunities. These opportunities are un-homsesteaded (opportunities) until invested in by individuals either by expenditure of time effort and resources, or by forgoing opportunities for consumption. As such the proximity of people and the institution of reciprocity under law produce a commons of opportunities that we seize (homestead) by competition. As such no one may claim interest in an opportunity without conducting and exchange by which to seize it.
And where people lie:
- To advance an interest
- To obtain an interest
- To preserve an interest
And where the Spectrum of Lying consists of:
- Intent to deceive.
- Failure of due diligence against lying
- Carrier of and distributor of lies
- Carrier of tradition and culture of lies.
- A genetic predisposition to lie.
Where
- White Lie: Preservation or construction of an emotional (status, relationship) debt or credit.
- Grey Lie: Protecting interests from liability due to an accidental harm to others’ interests.
- Black Lie: Gaining an interest by intentional destruction or transfer of another’s interests.
- Evil Lie: Causing harm to others interest for the purpose of causing harm rather than gaining interest for the self.
Where Lying consists in:
Failure of due diligence against:
- ignorance, error, bias, and wishful thinking,
And making use of:
- Loading, Framing, Obscuring, Suggestion;
- Ridiculing, Shaming, Moralizing, Psychologizing, Gossiping, Propagandizing Reputation Destruction;
- Sophisms (Overloading), (Appealing to cognitive biases);
- Straw Manning via Negativa, and Heaping of Undue Praise via Positiva;
- Fictionalisms of Idealism, Innumeracy, Pseudoscience, Supernaturalism;
- Fictions (Deceit)
- Denialism
- Truthful Speech
Instead of:
Where Truthful speech consists of:
1. categorically consistent (identity)
2. internally consistent (logic)
3. externally correspondent (empirical)
4. operationally consistent (existentially possible)
5. rationally consistent (rational choice)
6. reciprocally consistent (reciprocal rational choice)
7. consistent within limits, and
8. consistent in scope: fully accounting (complete)
9. consistent across all those eight dimensions (coherent)
And where:
9. the scope of possible consequences are limited to those for which restitution(restoration) is possible; (worst case scenario)
10. and where such scope is warrantied by sufficient resources to perform such restitution. (worst case scenario)
And where Truthfulness Refers to its definition in the Series:
1. Tautological Truth: That testimony you give when promising the equality of two statements using different terms: A circular definition, a statement of equality or a statement of identity.
2. Analytic Truth: The testimony you give promising the internal consistency of one or more statements used in the construction of a proof in an axiomatic(declarative) system. (a Logical Truth).
3. Ideal Truth: That testimony (description) you would give, if your knowledge (information) was complete, your language was sufficient, stated without error, cleansed of bias, and absent deceit, within the scope of precision limited to the context of the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possessed of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony. (Ideal Truth = Perfect Parsimony.)
4. Truthfulness*: that testimony (description) you give if your knowledge (information) is incomplete, your language is insufficient, you have performed due diligence in the elimination of error, imaginary content, wishful thinking, bias, fictionalism, and deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and which you warranty to be so; and the promise that another possessed of the knowledge, performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
4. Honesty: that testimony (description) you give with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.
And where Truthfulness Satisfies the Demand for Infallibility in Decidability in the Series:
1. Intelligible: Decidable enough to imagine a conceptual relationship
2. Reasonable: Decidable enough for me to feel confident that my decision will satisfy my needs, and is not a waste of time, energy, resources.
3. Actionable: Decidable enough for me to take actions given time, effort, knowledge, resources.
4. Ethical and Moral: Decidable enough for me to not impose risk or costs upon the interests of others, or cause others to retaliate against me, if they have knowledge of and transparency into my actions.
5. Normative: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values.
6. Judicial: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different knowledge, comprehension and values.
7. Scientific: Decidable regardless of all opinions or perspectives (âTrueâ)
8. Logical: Decidable out of physical or logical necessity
9. Tautological: Decidedly identical in properties (referents) if not references (terms). So to borrow the one of many terms from Economics, we can see in this series (list) a market demand for increasingly infallible decidability.
Where Decidability refers to
- In the REVERSE: a question (statement) is DECIDABLE if an algorithm (set of operations) exists within the limits of the system (rules, axioms, theories) that can produce a decision (choice). In other words, if the sufficient information for the decision is present (ie: is decidable) within the âsystemâ(ie: grammar).
- In the OBVERSE: Instead, we should determine if there is a means of choosing without the need for additional information supplied from outside the system (ie: not discretionary).
- Or in simple terms, if DISCRETION is necessary the question is undecidable, and if discretion is unnecessary, a proposition is decidable. This separates reason (or calculation in the wider sense) from computation (algorithm).