3 added 1 character in body
source | link

I think there trivially is a connection in some sense, but recognition must not be reciprocal.

The forth part refers to "when such a stance is taken", which leads to (3), "a stance must be taken towards them", while "them" is defined in (2) as "internal ascriptions"

So basically, (4) is in fact talking about the posibility of reciprocal recognition in the sense of (a stance towards) internal acriptions. That really is what the instruments you mentioned are made offor and what makes networks "social" ones, as there are social communities and interactions in there which rely on the reciprocal recognition of internal ascriptions:

Like buttons: Something representing/containing/implying an internal ascription is posted, in this post, the internal ascription as recognized by someone who endorses it by using the button and by this makes the reciprocity possible.

Comments: Basically the same as like buttons, but with the possibility of disagreement and more differentiated propositional content.

Friendship requests: While not necessarily used as such (more like "seen one time, ok friendship request!"), the idea seems to be that two people reciprocally recognize each other as having a bond in the sense of at least some internal ascription.

Using the example of the friendship request: Making it already fulfils recognition, denying implies a lack of reciprocity.

I think there trivially is a connection in some sense, but recognition must not be reciprocal.

The forth part refers to "when such a stance is taken", which leads to (3), "a stance must be taken towards them", while "them" is defined in (2) as "internal ascriptions"

So basically, (4) is in fact talking about the posibility of reciprocal recognition in the sense of internal acriptions. That really is what the instruments you mentioned are made of and what makes networks "social" ones, as there are social communities and interactions in there which rely on the reciprocal recognition of internal ascriptions:

Like buttons: Something representing/containing/implying an internal ascription is posted, in this post, the internal ascription as recognized by someone who endorses it by using the button and by this makes the reciprocity possible.

Comments: Basically the same as like buttons, but with the possibility of disagreement and more differentiated propositional content.

Friendship requests: While not necessarily used as such (more like "seen one time, ok friendship request!"), the idea seems to be that two people reciprocally recognize each other as having a bond in the sense of at least some internal ascription.

Using the example of the friendship request: Making it already fulfils recognition, denying implies a lack of reciprocity.

I think there trivially is a connection in some sense, but recognition must not be reciprocal.

The forth part refers to "when such a stance is taken", which leads to (3), "a stance must be taken towards them", while "them" is defined in (2) as "internal ascriptions"

So basically, (4) is in fact talking about the posibility of reciprocal recognition in the sense of (a stance towards) internal acriptions. That really is what the instruments you mentioned are made for and what makes networks "social" ones, as there are social communities and interactions in there which rely on the reciprocal recognition of internal ascriptions:

Like buttons: Something representing/containing/implying an internal ascription is posted, in this post, the internal ascription as recognized by someone who endorses it by using the button and by this makes the reciprocity possible.

Comments: Basically the same as like buttons, but with the possibility of disagreement and more differentiated propositional content.

Friendship requests: While not necessarily used as such (more like "seen one time, ok friendship request!"), the idea seems to be that two people reciprocally recognize each other as having a bond in the sense of at least some internal ascription.

Using the example of the friendship request: Making it already fulfils recognition, denying implies a lack of reciprocity.

2 added 5 characters in body
source | link

I think thisthere trivially is the casea connection in some sense, but recognition must not be reciprocal.

The forth part refers to "when such a stance is taken", which leads to (3), "a stance must be taken towards them", while "them" is defined in (2) as "internal ascriptions"

So basically, (4) is in fact talking about the posibility of reciprocal recognition in the sense of internal acriptions. That really is what the instruments you mentioned are made of and what makes networks "social" ones, as there are social communities and interactions in there which rely on the reciprocal recognition of internal ascriptions:

Like buttons: Something representing/containing/implying an internal ascription is posted, in this post, the internal ascription as recognized by someone who endorses it by using the button and by this makes the reciprocity possible.

Comments: Basically the same as like buttons, but with the possibility of disagreement and more differentiated propositional content.

Friendship requests: While not necessarily used as such (more like "seen one time, ok friendship request!"), the idea seems to be that two people reciprocally recognize each other as having a bond in the sense of at least some internal ascription.

Using the example of the friendship request: Making it already fulfils recognition, denying implies a lack of reciprocity.

I think this trivially is the case in some sense, but recognition must not be reciprocal.

The forth part refers to "when such a stance is taken", which leads to (3), "a stance must be taken towards them", while "them" is defined in (2) as "internal ascriptions"

So basically, (4) is in fact talking about the posibility of reciprocal recognition in the sense of internal acriptions. That really is what the instruments you mentioned are made of and what makes networks "social" ones, as there are social communities and interactions in there which rely on the reciprocal recognition of internal ascriptions:

Like buttons: Something representing/containing/implying an internal ascription is posted, in this post, the internal ascription as recognized by someone who endorses it by using the button and by this makes the reciprocity possible.

Comments: Basically the same as like buttons, but with the possibility of disagreement and more differentiated propositional content.

Friendship requests: While not necessarily used as such (more like "seen one time, ok friendship request!"), the idea seems to be that two people reciprocally recognize each other as having a bond in the sense of at least some internal ascription.

Using the example of the friendship request: Making it already fulfils recognition, denying implies a lack of reciprocity.

I think there trivially is a connection in some sense, but recognition must not be reciprocal.

The forth part refers to "when such a stance is taken", which leads to (3), "a stance must be taken towards them", while "them" is defined in (2) as "internal ascriptions"

So basically, (4) is in fact talking about the posibility of reciprocal recognition in the sense of internal acriptions. That really is what the instruments you mentioned are made of and what makes networks "social" ones, as there are social communities and interactions in there which rely on the reciprocal recognition of internal ascriptions:

Like buttons: Something representing/containing/implying an internal ascription is posted, in this post, the internal ascription as recognized by someone who endorses it by using the button and by this makes the reciprocity possible.

Comments: Basically the same as like buttons, but with the possibility of disagreement and more differentiated propositional content.

Friendship requests: While not necessarily used as such (more like "seen one time, ok friendship request!"), the idea seems to be that two people reciprocally recognize each other as having a bond in the sense of at least some internal ascription.

Using the example of the friendship request: Making it already fulfils recognition, denying implies a lack of reciprocity.

1
source | link

I think this trivially is the case in some sense, but recognition must not be reciprocal.

The forth part refers to "when such a stance is taken", which leads to (3), "a stance must be taken towards them", while "them" is defined in (2) as "internal ascriptions"

So basically, (4) is in fact talking about the posibility of reciprocal recognition in the sense of internal acriptions. That really is what the instruments you mentioned are made of and what makes networks "social" ones, as there are social communities and interactions in there which rely on the reciprocal recognition of internal ascriptions:

Like buttons: Something representing/containing/implying an internal ascription is posted, in this post, the internal ascription as recognized by someone who endorses it by using the button and by this makes the reciprocity possible.

Comments: Basically the same as like buttons, but with the possibility of disagreement and more differentiated propositional content.

Friendship requests: While not necessarily used as such (more like "seen one time, ok friendship request!"), the idea seems to be that two people reciprocally recognize each other as having a bond in the sense of at least some internal ascription.

Using the example of the friendship request: Making it already fulfils recognition, denying implies a lack of reciprocity.