[MUSIC]
So in, in, in, in some ways the a lot depends on where you position
reciprocity if you're, in the h squared stream
and, and you, you have this self-interested person.
Kind of thinking about whether I want reciprocity or
not, or just pursuing his or her own particular self-interest.
And, and nostrum's stream and others, we read Benkler in this class,
reciprocity is there at the start, and
then that makes a big difference, doesn't it?
>> Absolutely, and the problem that Hobbes has, is how do you.
It's a kind of a catch-22 problem.
If we have a structure here we're there's a
social expectations of reciprocity, and people therefore are benefiting
from those networks that provide that kind of reciprocity,
and the opportunities to engage cooperatively with others and making
everybody better off. Then it's in your self interest.
>> Yeah >> To play by the rules.
>> Right. >> In places where you don't have it.
Then, how do you get it rolling?
>> Yeah. >> Because that requires trust.
>> Right.
>> And if you don't already have reciprocity, how can you.
>> How do you generate trust, yeah. Yeah.
And we, we're, we're going to be talking to Lewis Hyde in this, in
this class, whose work on on the commons and, and, has been so important, and
on the gift for artists in the
United States and for thinking about intellectual property.
And, and, he, he really insists on the, on, on the mistake
of trying to separate the ego, or the individual, from systems of reciprocity
as a starting point because, because then you're always concerned about how to
protect that individual rather than how to nourish an ongoing web of reciprocity
that is part of what it means to be human. >> Absolutely, yeah,
that's absolutely right. And, you know, a kind of concrete example
of that is the shift
we see in many areas of public policy. >> Mm-hm.
Towards focusing on the incentives that providers are offered for engaging
in certain kinds of behavior. >> Mm-hm.
>> And we have these wonderful words like incentivize, [LAUGH] and so forth.
And, and the alternative to that would be codes of professional conduct.
>> Mm-hm.
>> And professional ethics, you know, which people,
providers see themselves as having responsibilities to the community.
>> Yes.
>> Responsibilities to the profession, that their profession
comes with, tied to, a moral good. >> Interesting, yes.
>> So that my performance as a lawyer.
>> Yes.
>> As an educator is not too measured by how much the returns I make
for it, but rather by my conformity to a certain code of ethics and my realization.
That's the purposes that the profession is defined
around and, particularly you think about health is
defined around the, i mean the, physicians are
defined in terms of the value of health,
their lawyers are defined by value of justice.
>> Right.
>> And education in terms of the value of knowledge.
So when you try to defect my behavior by incentivizing me.
>> Right.
>> I actually may have become more of this ego.
>> Right, right. >> Especially than I
would have been before.
And that brings us to the idea that, what
do people count as part of their self interest?
>> Yes.
>> And that's going to be part of their identity.
>> Right, and that identity isn't just individual, isn't just isolated.
>> Right, we form our identities
through comparison of ourselves with others.
>> Right.
>> Through the social interactions that we engage in, and so forth.
>> And this is Benkler's big theme, right, is that,
that the mistake we make is to think that we
just layer on the social after the core individuality is there.
And core individuality as, you just
said, core individuality is constructed in relationship
and he likes to use the examples
in contemporary technology about Wikipedia, for example.
One of his favorite examples is that
cooperation can become part of one's ethos and
not and it goes all the way down.
It's not something that you can just layer on.
And, and, or, or try to maximize your individual good through
your being a lawyer, or being a, an editor of Wikipedia.
It's just, it's just, it's part of who you are, in relation to others.
>> Right, exactly.
And, and his idea, he argues along with many others that are
intellectual property laws in this country have become way out of whack.
>> Yes.
>> Because by creating these very strong property rights,
and ideas, and knowledge, and so on and so forth.
They wall people off from each other.
>> Yeah.
>> And the growth of culture and the growth of knowledge and so on
and so forth, is a function of the free flow of ideas and so forth.
>> Yes. >> You don't write something to Nova.
>> Right.
>> You are responding to the voices of your culture, of your tradition.
>> Yes.
>> And if you can't appropriate that, those ideas.
And transform them, you can't produce anything new.
>> Exactly.
>> And so, the whole idea behind
intellectual property laws is that it's supposed to
give people the incentive to come up with new ideas and so on and so forth.
>> Yeah.
>> But if you push it too far in that direction.
>> Right.
>> You actually undercut the growth of knowledge.
>> This is Hyde's theme as well, Louis Hyde's theme as well.
[COUGH] And we had when Professor Lawrence Lessig visit Wesleyan a few years ago
and I'm hoping to talk with him in the context of this class as well.
Of just, on just on this theme about how the emphasis on protecting the
individual actually can be an impoverishment both
of the cultural and of the individual, ultimately.
[LAUGH] >> Exactly right.
>> Ultimately.
In this course the you know, we're, we're, we're starting off with this, this,
this idea of a social good because it's, and we've chosen
themes that are not let me put it this way, particularist.
So we're going on next week to talk about, poverty
and how to, how to combat it, especially extreme poverty.
Then we'll
be talking about climate change and then we'll be talking about issues
around education, especially education and gender,
and then, you know, we've chosen these
large themes because I hope the students who are participating in the
class would not say, well I do not really care about climate change.
It is not of my business or I do not care about education.
It is not my business.
It seems like it is a human business. It is part of our social being.
>> Mm-hm.
>> That the, that we have to confront these issues
that, they're not something we can just separate ourselves from.
>> Yeah, well, you think about climate change; this
is very much a tragedy of the common situation.
>> Yes.
>> You've heard, and one proposal that's often put forward
to address it is a cap and trade system. >> Yes.
>> Cap and trade system, in effect, creates property rights
in the atmosphere. >> Yeah.
>> It's, so it's very much Lockian. >> Yeah.
>> Kind of thing in terms of what we were talking about before.
>> Yes.
>> Carbon tax, on the other hand, is what [LAUGH] you could
say as, well it's it, it, it's more of, of ruled by [UNKNOWN].
>> Yes.
>> But it's not I, I, I won't go down that road.
>> Yeah.
>> It's like it's more complicated. >> Yeah.
But that, it does you need a strong external authority.
I guess I, I.
>> You need some system of social organization.
>> Right.
>> To take care of it, and Austin's work depends heavily, for example,
upon the idea that, that the actions of people are visible to each other.
>> Yes.
>> Since climate change is a global problem.
>> Right.
We, there's no way of settling outside of some kind of
a systematic structure of authority that well generate rules that everybody
will follow.
But it doesn't have to be a, Leviathin, or a Hobbesian.
>> Right.
>> Kind of approach.
Because, since its in everyone's interest to follow
those rules, if everyone else is doing so.
If we could develop a structure through which the rules could be agreed.
>> Yes.
>> And, it's reasonable to think that that structure will
be effective, even if there's some free-riding that goes on.
>> Yeah, it's interesting in her work the,
she, she points out these, these, systems of communal management, and or
communal participation that preserves resources over
ti-, over long periods of time.
That works so well because of the kind of tradition of trust.
>> Mm.
>> And I guess one of the things we're trying to confront now is, how
do you jump-start that, or how do you
ignite traditions of trust without creating a Leviathan?
>> Mm-Hm.
>> To do it and, and
one of the themes, in this class will be how do we promote social good.
I mean, I'm, I'm, this is a class.
We're not asking people to, to become
Marxists or Liberals or Conservatives or Anarchists.
You know, we're not asking people to, to subscribe
to an ideology, but we are asking people to
think about how they can promote social good, how
they can promote an enrichment of the commons, I guess.
>> Yes, Yes.
>> In the language
we've been use today, using today and are there authors that
you teach or, or have been thinking about that give us any
indications or help about this notion of how can you promote
or add to the enrichment of the commons, of the social good?
>> A while ago we were talking about the conditions under which
people acting individualistically in terms of their own projects and self interests,
