The Psychology of Gift Giving - Essay Example

 The Psychology of Gift Giving A distinguished line of anthropologists has been interested in gift giving (Boas 1895; Malinowski 1922; Mauss 2000), perhaps because of the extravagance and importance of gift-giving rituals in both primitive and modern societies. In the modern day gift, literature gifts can be distinguished in an anti-utilitarian and a utilitarian way. From the anti-utilitarian view, the freedom of the gift is seen as one of its main characteristics, while the idea that gifts are caught in a cycle of reciprocity is given a lower profile. This is because, a gift is given without the expectation that the person giving it will gain anything whatsoever from whom they accord a gift. According to the utilitarian approach, assumptions about rational actors weighing their preferences based on some utility are much-founded (Tsing 1993 pg 77). Reciprocity is seen as undermining ‘genuine’ gifts in the former approach while utilitarian approach does take reciprocity into account though it fails to analyze why the principle of reciprocity is so effective while it comes to gifts. By providing light on both the variety of the forms of gift and the universality of the underlying principles, the argument presented hence states that gifts reflect a multi-purpose symbolic ‘utility’ that transcends both utilitarianism and anti-utilitarianism aspects of the idea (Mauss 2000 pg 101-10). In most anthropological accounts, reciprocity is essential and accepting a gift implies a solemn obligation of repayment. Therefore, the arts works by Mauss revolves around the analysis of gift giving events with the objective disclosing the underlying rules around gifts and gifts giving and their circulation. In his work, Mauss reiterates that the theory of market did not first arise simply due to the invention of money rather as a human phenomenon, which involved rules, and contracts as experienced in the archaic societies. This therefore shows that before the invent of money there was already a well-established exchange system based on rules rather than the modern notion that is money and commodity transactions. Politically, Mauss argues that the analysis of the social rules guiding gifts and gift giving mostly in the archaic society gives room for us to draw some moral conclusions concerning organizational principles that our societies face (Mauss 2000 pg 120-4). According to Mauss 2000, gift giving involves an exchange as opposed to any other form of unilateral offering. This form of exchange is quite clear and sharply contrasts with the market exchange where both money and price is much dominant. As opposed to the money market transactions that are instantaneous and anonymous, the gifts form of exchange lays down a durable foundation and bonding obligations (Durkheim 2008 pg 58). Hence, the three components of gifts and gift giving according to Mauss are as follows: - One, it creates reciprocities and obligations to give and to be given back in return. Both the giving and reciprocation are separated by the passing of time; this implies prolongation and durability of this aspect including some form of measure of uncertainty about the timing and nature of the reciprocation. Lastly, according to Mauss, gifts are exchanged within social relations, which fall among the four types of social human relationships that become entangled in the cycle of offering and reciprocation depicting quite powerful inducements, rewards and motives for repeated and ongoing exchange. Hence, gift giving is tied up in these relations and drives, power and status, social compacts and alliances, which relate to the gifts themselves (Mauss 2000 pg 30-8). My personal experience about gifts and gift giving is quite instrumental and positive. As opposed to the negative perceptions by many about gifts and gift giving, I have learnt to know that this system can shape the society dramatically in a variety of ways such as their view of objects, occasions, ritual, relationships, principle and the spirit. I decided to help a group of children paying their school fees and foods so that they could achieve education. My motivation behind gift giving to these children is an aspect of generosity and unconditional with an aim of reciprocation through their skills to the society (Mauss 2000 pg 63-67). According to my personal experience, understanding the givers motivation is much crucial to analyze the three-phase gift dynamic. It is therefore highly crucial for the children to appreciate whatever gift of education I am giving to them. I though do not expect an immediate return and as well do not specify the value of the return expecting that the exchange will eventually balance out. This is why the relationship between the parents and their children are defined as generalized reciprocity, which discourages envy, greed, and social tension. This fuels corporation, and generosity, which I expect my case to be founded upon. Up to this far, I take a stance against two influential contemporary views of the gift and gift giving. While on the one hand, the anti-utilitarian perspective of the gift emphasizes its potential to overcome a too economized view of society, the utilitarian approach on its part focuses on the instrumental rationality of gift-giving practices (Tsing 1993 pg 88-93). My own position is that human gift giving is too layered and too complex to be incarcerated in such a one-dimensional perspective. To appreciate fully the institutions of total prostration and the potlatch two complementary factors ought to be explained. It should be in record that this aspect does not only carry alongside it obligations of repaying the gifts received but also two other vital factors which is the obligation to give out presents and the obligation to receive them which is subject to receipt of a number of facts (Durkheim 2008 pg 18). Gift giving is not only important today but it also was in the past. This includes its importance as reiterated in the New Guinea in the 1970’s. First and foremost, gifts and gift giving is a very influential tool which can be used to create eternal peace among warring communities ensuring that the causes of such conflicts are completely done with and total peace achieved after the exchange of gifts (Durkheim 2008 pg 23-7). As a characteristic of gift giving, there is the element of reciprocity that comes with it and hence a ritual obligation between the separated communities not to go back into war. Secondly, gifts were a symbol of responsibility in that it instilled a sense of responsibility to both the giver and the recipient. This demanded a likewise treatment to the givers just as it is to the recipients (Mauss 2000 pg 46). In the olden societies, gift giving enhanced vital aspects of the society such as globalization, gender, class, race and ethnicity. This engages the parties involved through enhanced ethnographic examples hence supporting historical value of the relevance of anthropology (Durkheim 2008 pg 50). Therefore, depending on which view, there are stylized facts concerning gifts and gift giving in the modern settings and hence while the analysis seems well for simple gifts on special occasions like business and bonding sessions. The same is not suitable in all the settings like family and pure charity, this makes it advisable for a caution to be taken when giving gifts. Works Cited Abu-Lughod, Lila. Veiled Sentiments. California: University of California Press, 1986. Print. Durkheim, Emile. Elementary Forms of Religious Life. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print. Mauss, Marcel. The Gift. Princeton: W. W. Norton & Company, 2000. Print. Tsing, Anna. In the Realm of the Diamond Queen. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1993. Print. Read More