---
entity_slug: mutual_servitude
evaluator: null
evaluated_at: '2026-02-23T05:56:33.200524'
overall_score: 4.4
scores:
- name: definition_precision
  value: 4.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The definition clearly articulates a specific concept of reciprocal economic
    dependency with concrete examples of what each party provides. It avoids circularity
    and distinguishes mutual servitude from simple trade by emphasizing the systematic,
    balanced nature of the relationship.
- name: source_grounding
  value: 5.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This concept is directly grounded in Smith's text from Book III, Chapter
    1, where he explicitly discusses the reciprocal dependency between town and country.
    The definition accurately reflects Smith's argument about how urban and rural
    areas serve each other's needs through specialization.
- name: domain_placement
  value: 5.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: The "Exchange" domain is perfectly appropriate since mutual servitude
    describes the fundamental mechanism by which town and country exchange different
    types of goods and services. This is quintessentially about exchange relationships
    rather than production, distribution, or consumption per se.
- name: vsm_relevance
  value: 3.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity has moderate VSM relevance as it could map to S1 (primary
    operations of exchange) or S2 (coordination between different economic sectors).
    However, it's more of a structural relationship than a specific system function,
    making the VSM mapping somewhat forced.
- name: explanatory_value
  value: 5.0
  max_value: 5.0
  rationale: This entity provides excellent explanatory power by illuminating the
    fundamental mechanism that drives economic interdependence and counters zero-sum
    thinking. It reveals how division of labor creates structural relationships that
    benefit both parties, which is central to Smith's economic theory.
---

# Evaluation: Mutual Servitude

## definition_precision — 4.0 / 5.0

The definition clearly articulates a specific concept of reciprocal economic dependency with concrete examples of what each party provides. It avoids circularity and distinguishes mutual servitude from simple trade by emphasizing the systematic, balanced nature of the relationship.

## source_grounding — 5.0 / 5.0

This concept is directly grounded in Smith's text from Book III, Chapter 1, where he explicitly discusses the reciprocal dependency between town and country. The definition accurately reflects Smith's argument about how urban and rural areas serve each other's needs through specialization.

## domain_placement — 5.0 / 5.0

The "Exchange" domain is perfectly appropriate since mutual servitude describes the fundamental mechanism by which town and country exchange different types of goods and services. This is quintessentially about exchange relationships rather than production, distribution, or consumption per se.

## vsm_relevance — 3.0 / 5.0

This entity has moderate VSM relevance as it could map to S1 (primary operations of exchange) or S2 (coordination between different economic sectors). However, it's more of a structural relationship than a specific system function, making the VSM mapping somewhat forced.

## explanatory_value — 5.0 / 5.0

This entity provides excellent explanatory power by illuminating the fundamental mechanism that drives economic interdependence and counters zero-sum thinking. It reveals how division of labor creates structural relationships that benefit both parties, which is central to Smith's economic theory.
