I don't see how showing love through gifts is always "material". If I know my partner likes Witcher 3, I'd get them a witcher medallion because it would remind them of their favourite game and make them happy. I enjoy receiving gifts because I like having items that remind me of people I love. Maybe it's just me, though. Like "give experiences instead of material goods" as if those goods can't be tied to experiences? I've always been a collector so again, maybe it's my particular case, but items that remind me of pleasant memories are always something I look forward to. It's what gives value to those items/gifts in the first place. Heck, going with your partner on a holiday to a place they've always wanted to see as a surprise for them is a gift that will inevitability produce pleasant and authentic experiences for you both. The language of this article is needlessly gloomy, "imposing item on a recepient" is a very weird way to say giving someone an item. And I don't see what's wrong with appreciating someone's effort to make us happy even if we don't really like that particular colour.

I understand there are dark and problematic implications regarding our consumerist culture and the empty compulsion to buy things constantly, or to give ourselves an upper-hand in a relationship, but individually, "gift giving" could be and, in my experience mostly is, a positive act for all parties involved. It's needlessly reductive to separate gift-giving and attentiveness/shared experiences as if they can't coexist and positively influence one another. I wouldn't even consider giving material goods to gain power, abuse someone or gain something in return to be "gifting".

Not to mention people who expect being gifted back in a relationship are that way usually because they have themselves tied "love" to the attentiveness needed for a meaningful gift, they think they are loved if their partner does the same thing they do. Which is wrong, sure, but a less gloomy and understandable position for someone to find themselves in.

>...where I draw the line I guess.

So, the line is the limit of your interest in the subject, right?

I don’t hold others to the same expectations I hold myself to. I believe I am an awful gift recipient for two reasons. I had a pretty abusive childhood that I was always told I didn’t deserve anything and grew up poor poor and subsequently never received anything. Someday I’ll deal with my past trauma… or maybe not.

If you hold yourself to a very high standard in gift giving, could that affect your expectations for others?

[deleted]

I used to be like that. Reading senecas essay on benefits was useful for me, not just in how to give but especially in how to receive and show gratitude. I always felt grateful but so awkward and indebted.

Absolutely. My point is that sometimes levels of analysis are confused. If we talk about non-linguistic creatures, ecological psychology allows explanations of these phenomena without appeal to propositional content. Anscombe and Ryle develop good non-factualist accounts of intention or action in which patterns of behavior can be explained intentionally (for example, as a behavior caused by fear), but understanding the intentional idiom as a discursive ticket that permits a better scale of explanation, rather than assuming there's an entity-like fact under some category (emotions for example).

I’m all for overthinking theories of justice, ethics, and cognition but there’s something absurd about overthinking Christmas gifts where I draw the line I guess.

Sure, the sensitive tribal political message angle is perfect for philosophy/anthropology nerds but allow me play the gadfly and acknowledge if you have lost all ability to accept a gift graciously, perhaps you are the one who have lost their way in this subreddit.

The Dawn of Everything had something in this vein.

i tend not to give presents for Christmas and birthdays to my kids (they already get too much "anything they want" throughout the year). but have been coaxed into putting something (even symbolic says my 12-year-old) under the tree this year. For tradition reasons she says.

I can't for the life of God enjoy receiving presents. and almost dread them.

Yup, agreed. I like to give a modest gift that I know happens to align with their priorities/challenges/passions/pain points. Not on the life changing level but on the "ohh fuckin sweet man thank you haha" type level. The best gift a person can give is convenience

I like that.

I also follow the "karma" theory. e. g. daughter talks a lot about stranger things, I see a stranger things christmas jumper, I buy it as a gift for her.

girlfriend talks about getting into a shop to buy a new phone for her son. I have a spare new one that I bought online and it's 2x as good and half as expensive as the one she'd get in the shop - off it goes to her son. etcetc

Yeah its an ambiguous area because no two definitions of what qualifies as special would be the same but im imagining a world where to give a gift would actually be a humbling and gracious act thatd youd only feel comfortable doing in very specific circumstances, and to expect a gift from anyone would be considered pompous

Do you consider words and shared experiences material then?

My reply started getting long so I’ll just blog about this in the new year.

Thanks for the replies so far. =)

>I think that the cognitive/perceptual basis of empathy doesn't need propositional content

I would say this depends on the emotions involved. For emotions that dont need content, i agree. Or at least i can't imagine Fear without any object of fear, else it would be anxiety ("I fear" alone feels more like "I fear, ..."). And if i understood correctly the question arises if the basis of empathy lets me feel anxiety and fear differently or if it lets me feel both as anxiety , but in one case i later give one the attribute of a certain fear.

"The beauty of the world is the only thing that can be found in this life and the way it is. I am not sure what to do about the fact that life is not a real thing, but I think it is a good idea for us to be able to leave. We are not going to be here for much longer, but we will have plenty of time to get together"

This is interesting and resonates loud with what I've learnt to perceive. But if it's to be unexpected then it shouldn't be given for a special reason, as it would be expected.

But perhaps I've misunderstood what you mean by special reason.

Always gift, you gain when giving.

The problem I see there is assuming that empathy requires prepositional attitudes. Not that once you engage in linguistic practices it doesn't acquire conceptual content, but I think that the cognitive/perceptual basis of empathy doesn't need propositional content. In eco psych terms it can be analyzed through the sharing of attention and intention, and in sociocognitive terms with some forms of mindshaping that doesn't necessarily require prepositional attitudes.

It should be kept separate from philosophy.

it's a tad bit teleological; a 'know it when I see it' thing

or, you could say/argue, there's no concrete taxonomy associated with it

The very existence of gift-expectation neutralizes the meaning of gift giving. A gift should be given under the explicit understanding that you wont get anything back, because your gift itself would be a surprise.

Gifts should only be for very special reasons and should be either private or anonymous. Otherwise its not really about the illustration of caring, its about self-reward at the recipients expense (granted, that recipient may "make out" on the deal from a materialistic standpoint,though)

That seems an absurd observation in a Philosophy thread.

You lost?

What about empathy? Doesn't that make it possible to have such propositional attitudes without any capacity for linguistic practices?

I mean this is just my surface level understanding. I feel like emotional connection is kinda "below!" tasks of higher cognition, as it does also involve the limbic system.