Blog #11

The experiment regarding merchants and the role(s) they play in the economy was very interesting regarding the implicit and explicit communication that went on between not only the villagers themselves, but amongst the merchants as well. From mine and Brent’s role as producers and merchants, I feel we were better able to experience the full spectrum of exchange and cooperation, both implicit and explicit. For example, even though it took us a bit of time to find the correct production specialization and a suitable trading partner, once these tasks were accomplished we were able to take excess producer inventory to the merchant market and once there exchange these blue goods for the most pink goods we could obtain. However, we did not explicitly tell our producing partner we were going to take the excess inventory, nor did we tell them how we would (or even if we would) distribute the pink goods upon our return to the village. This type of non-verbal implicit communication could have been due to the fact that test subjects are immediately grouped into a cyber “villages” and when individuals are initially classified as a village, to me there is a certain amount of obligation to the group as a whole for ensuring favorable outcomes for your fellow “villagers”. This village atmosphere could then contribute to a strong in-group affiliation resulting in the lack of specific and explicit communication among villagers, and yet lead to favorable gains for trading partners within the villages. Like I said, as I recall neither Brent nor myself at any time imparted information to our partner regarding the excess blue inventory, but our partner was able to see this action through the declining balance in their field. Upon our return from the merchant area, this trust was rewarded by the equal split of the pink goods. I suppose we could have negotiated regarding the division of the pink goods, but I don’t think it would have been advantageous for Brent or I seeing that it was excess producer inventory that was used to acquire the pink goods in the first place. This could have provided motivation for our not attempting negotiation, but I believe the desire to fairly compensate our producer ally was the prime reason for the equitable division of the pink goods. Additionally, as I recall when we returned from the merchant area with the pink goods, our producer partner did not even inquire regarding the terms of the trade between us (Brent and I) and our merchant partner. This would seem out of step with a real-world transaction of this sort because it seems that nowadays nobody would give anyone who was not a blood relative charge over valuable goods without an expressed written agreement specifically outlining terms, conditions, and penalties for failure to comply with the contract. This lack of formality in the village area could in part be explained by our classroom association. As a whole our class could be somewhat viewed as an in-group prior to the assigning of the “village” term and the associated obligations that implicitly and instinctually go along with that association. When the word instinct comes into play regarding this experiment, I wonder if somehow the merchant acted as a type of physical facilitator to bridge, as Hayek puts it, the gap between “instinct and reason”. Hayek claims that cultural evolution (custom and tradition) lies between instinct and reason, and I wonder if one can view the merchant area (with its much more formal and impersonal exchanges) as a result of the implementation of man’s reason then this kind analogy kind of makes sense. In any event, the experiment was excellent insofar that it illuminated the merchant’s role(s) in an extended order.