Reciprocity:

Let us briefly be anthropologists and look at another older society. Sir Joseph Banks tells us that when the H.M.S. Endeavour was anchored off the eastern coast of Australia in 1771 they met up with the aboriginal people for the first time. The people were naked, did not have proper houses, Just temporary wind breaks. They had very poor canoes and equipment and some strange weapons including the boomerang.

To the officers of Endeavour, they appeared very primitive and almost unapproachable, true hunters and gatherers with no agricultural support. Geologists tell us that the continent of Australia had been cut off from the rest of the world for thirty thousand years. The oldest known aboriginal rock paintings are considered to date back nineteen thousand years.

Banks and his officers were looking at a very unique society unaffected by thousands of years of change which had occurred in the rest of the world. The aboriginals of Australia were truly a separate development. They had no concept of European materialism, aggressiveness in war, European morals or religion, no concept of land ownership or European equipment such as guns.

Although it did not appear to Banks or his fellow officers at the time, we now know that the society he was looking at was a very stable one. An orderly society with a deep and separate culture, with well developed tribal laws, traditions and practices.

Here was a peaceful ancient society with very fixed rules of communal interaction. P.J. Wilson in "At Our Wits Beginning" tells us that it took the Europeans almost a hundred years to understand the aborigines' complicated laws of reciprocal trading in brides. Verbal contracted agreements were made which sometimes extended over two generations. In essence, one man's claim to a woman was established by his ability to grant the claims of another man. In one arrangement it was agreed that the daughter of one would become the mother-in-law to the son of the other. Another arrangement was for a man to offer his sister's daughter in exchange for a wife. The Aborigines would get very upset if a member of the tribe tried to cut across these arrangements- Colin Turnbull in "The Forest People" describes a somewhat similar bride system which occurred among the Pygmies of Africa.

What the Aboriginals of Australia and the Pygmies of Africa were doing was operating the age old law of reciprocity, a giving and receiving or equal value in return. All societies throughout the world depend on reciprocal exchange.

If the first law of human nature is "I want to live", the second is certainly the law of reciprocity, a giving and receiving in like value. It affects all human interactions. Those who abuse it do so at the risk of loss of social acceptance and grooming.

Egocentrism;

Let us put things around the other way. Let us ask why society complies with this universal law of reciprocity, what do we want from it? Could it be that we are really like the deprived Ik people and that the only reason we give is to receive something else in ex-change. That none of us, ever, does anything for nothing. This is a subject which sometimes stirs people up like few other ideas. We have been so indoctrinated with the idea of good works, loving our fellow man, and self sacrifice that we can feel very emotional toward the idea that there could be an ulterior motive behind our acts.

We do have innate drives related to the survival of our species. One of these is our concern to protect our personal dignity, another is a mother's response to her infant child. Even in these fundamental innate drives, there is a strong element of self interest. The following story shows what I mean but it also shows mother love in one of its truest and purest forms. Years ago before my boat builder introduced improved methods he used to cast the lead keels for new boats in the factory yard. An old cast iron bath became a crucible and would be filled with ingots of lead. Around this he would stack and burn the off-cuts of wood from the factory. Through a fitting in the bath he would run the molten lead into a prepared mould in the ground. There might have been two or three tons of molten lead in the iron bath before it was released.

It was quite a spectacular occasion, the intense fire, the manipulation of the lead, the birth of a new keel. On this occasion the boat-builder's wife and his two small sons were watching the operation. Suddenly a large crack appeared in the old cast iron bath and molten lead like a river flowed in two streams on each side and then completely surrounded one of his small sons.

Seeing what had happened the mother ran through the molten lead to snatch the boy to safety, resulting in very serious and painful burns to her own feet requiring hospital care. A very brave and loving mother indeed she was. Did she think of herself? No! she thought of her child and only of him.

But she did not do it for nothing. She ran through that molten lead to save her child from suffering. To preserve her own love relationship with her son. She did not think about it, but she did have a self interest. she was preserving and protecting something very dear to herself.

I may ask myself "why did my wife and I decide to share our lives?" Because we each wanted something from the other. A home, companionship, acceptance⁷ Why did you choose your husband? Because you thought he would be a good provider for you and your children. Because you could dominate him, because you needed someone to mother, or simply because he excited you or made you feel good, or one or more of many other reasons? One thing is certain, you did it for private gain of some kind. Most likely some gain other than material, but personal gain nonetheless.

Currently there are stickers appearing in the back windows of cars about Auckland stating, "I'd rather be Sailing". Then why are they going to work? To earn money to go sailing!

Let us therefore acknowledge that we are egocentric beings. We each think primarily of ourselves. There is always a reason why we do something. None of us ever does anything for nothing.

We may on occasion do something for a complete stranger or rescue an animal in distress. Basically we are thus preserving our own species or our environment. In that sense we do have a self interest. We have also been subjected to massive conditioning, which tends to predetermine what we shall do in a given situation. Why do we give gifts to famine relief funds or other charitable organisations? Is it not like saving "It we pay the price we prove to ourselves that we are kind and socially conscious people. And if we eive a public gift, we can prove to the public that we are generous persons". It is because we are socially involved that we refrain from anti-social behaviour and contribute to preserving our environment and species. We do have a self interest.