The Law of The Third Participant
Have you ever felt the need to repay a favor? Have you ever felt you shouldn’t accept a favor because it would not be worth the trouble? I have.
The law of reciprocity is real and practical. It may be the second most powerful force in human nature—second only to love. Simply, the law of reciprocity is a social agreement between two individuals that states: If you do a favor for me, then I’ll do a favor for you because I feel obligated to reciprocate.
It’s a simple thing almost all of us knew from preschool snack-swapping at lunch, but it somehow feels cheap today. If innocent preschoolers know about this idea of fairness without being taught, there must be something universal about it.
I’ve found that universal things are usually true.
- Evil is universal, so I know its existence is true, and thus, fighting it is corrective.
- Math is true, so I know the linguistic equivalent of math, logic, is true and right for my thinking.
- When I love my wife for who she is and not what she does for me, I feel my love for her reciprocated and radiated back toward me magnified.
- Even Newton, in his third law, said a force by object A onto object B creates an equal but opposite reaction.
What is universal is typically true.
Both, the youngest preschooler and the oldest wise woman, feel the universal law of reciprocity, which is likely universal to us all. Since we all feel it, I can use it as a strategy when dealing with others.
C.S. Lewis restated this same law in another way: Nothing that you have not given away will ever really be yours.
But where did this law of reciprocity arise? Where did Lewis’ law of losing whatever we don’t first give develop? Both seem similar. And we suspect they may be universal. No investor in the markets ever squandered all his capital and remained rich. But no one who wisely invests half of his wealth will remain poor. Investing is giving. And giving is investing.
Yet thinking of the laws as strategic would cheapen them, right? That would be transactional. But aren’t math and logic transactional, and we still use them both in the highest brow sciences and philosophies anyway?
What if someone strong shattered the boundaries of these laws? What if the universal laws were true because somebody wise defined truth?
What could you make of your life if you could believe this one true law: you only keep what you give?
What could you become if you followed the competent, giving footsteps of someone more noble than yourself?
will ever really be yours. – Lewis"
Tweet this
"Nothing that you have not given away
Every soldier knows if he wants his country to live free, he must offer up his life when it is requested. Life is universal. And bravery is universally right.
Supposing you found another party to all the laws, like a lawgiver. Just as all solved mathematical formulas have a balancing equal sign declaring the formula is true, this lawgiver would balance all laws out. Because this law of giving away to keep is universal, it is likely also true.
There are two verbs. But three, not two, actors in this law:
- You are the giver.
- Someone else is the receiver.
- But a third is not just a giver, but the lawgiver who repays the possessor who gave to set the law’s formula right.
And anything universal – like math – has to be held true by a law like logic. Because two plus two must always be four, it is not only universal and true; it is also law-like.
Now, if the lawgiver is active in the proportioning, it’s proper for us to conclude he is also like that great equalizing sign of all great and true formulas. But what if he could also add and remove from both sides of the ledger so they balanced?
And of course The Third Participant, as the universal lawgiver of truth, would always have abundant resources. Because anything he was involved in would always need to balance, and the world is full of greedy men like you and me.
- So, how should you act if this unseen third party not only writes the law but also balances it out?
- How should you act if this unseen Maestro in the orchestra pit keeps the ballerina and the oboist on the same beat?
- What would that mean for the times you’ve been taken advantage of?
- What does that mean for the poor orphans and widows of the world that Mother Teresa never reached?
If He does all that, then He also ensures that what you try to keep you lose.
If you undervalue the true power of this Third Participant in this law, it is like committing an evil against yourself. Because you can see He is necessary and powerful to balance out all your reciprocity, you can begin to understand why disbelieving Lewis’ law is foolish from a strategic standpoint. Just as Washington was a loving father of our country, he also built the gallows. Alexander bowed with his sword still fastened to his side. Competency remains balanced with its partner humility.
"If He does all that, then He also ensures that what you try to keep you lose. "
Tweet this
But The Third Participant also ensures what you plant and prune, like your money and competence, becomes something you can eat and find shade under.
- Imagine, however, this Third Participant exists as much as any equal sign or the fulcrum of a child’s see-saw.
- Imagine you are determined to be responsible to Him, and begin to reject the suspicions you were raised with and luck-focused comments all around you.
- Imagine what sort of man you could become then.
You’d begin to have the opportunity to look up and see opportunities for yourself, not just the social media-fueled hype of the false winners.
You would notice and think to yourself,
-
- “Hey, that’s something I could do.
- I could build that product.
- I could talk to that woman.
- I could volunteer there because that’s something I think I could solve.”
And that sort of industrious thinking will build worth on your inside and perhaps even wealth on your outside. And maybe even a little life lived on the edge.
The pairing of giving away to help others, with humble competence will make you incredibly potent.
