Are you saying that we shouldn't?
We have numerous choices in terms of actions that we could take, and yet, we think the others would opt for the one that we consider best, or at least, good. If that isn't wishful thinking, what is?
Trust isn't established in a second, though. It is based on experiences and observations from the past. Had you showed up here every week at the same time for years, I would naturally expect you to do so next week.
Inductive reasoning is weak, we all know that.
How else can we conduct our lives?
The brutal truth is...
Please do away with that announcement of yours for brutal truths, and just tell me what you think.
You would agree that it is brutal, though. The reason why we trust others is because we are lazy.
Are you talking about entrusting tasks to others?
I meant it more generally. Suppose I do not trust you. I will have to think what evil deeds you may commit and be prepared with a strategy for each possibility.
But if you trust me, you don't have to do all that thinking. Is this what you are getting at?
Well done, comrade! It doesn't have to concern anything that could be harmful. For example, an instructor can say that s/he trusts the student and shirk from giving appropriate advice and guidance. You see, what is conceived as freedom and liberty is brought to you by the courtesy of laziness.
If we do not trust someone or something when we safely can, we will be wasting our time and energy devising plans that we would never need. Besides, when we mistrust someone, it can well encourage her/him to act precisely in ways we consider undesirable.
When I was in high school, I went back home early one day and told my mother that I cut afternoon classes.
Who cuts school to go back home when you know your mother is waiting there? I knew you were à l'extrémité!
It wasn't that I wanted to smoke a cigarette and look at the sky or slip inside a movie theater when the attendant was looking the other way. I was eager to work on my own project at home, instead of attending boring lectures.
Knowing you, it must have been something like reading all of "À la recherche du temps perdu," making plans to replicate Captain Cook's and Marco Polo's journeys at the same time, or doing research on people who were outdone by others because they lacked marketing skills---Alfred Russel Wallace who lost to Charles Darwin, Nicola Tesla who lost to Thomas Edison and Wilhelm Röntgen among others, Rosalind Franklin who lost to Francis Crick and James Watson, and...
Ah, the glorious days when I could easily find people who had seen Minitel in use! It would be wickedly unfair to attribute the unfortunate turns of their professional lives to what you call lack of marketing skills, but let's say my project was something along those lines. Anyway, I was shocked when my mother started talking about her cutting school when she was in high school.
I didn't know that you thought she was a model student.
I didn't and still don't. It scared me that she talked approvingly of her own and my skipping classes. She even told me how bad some instructors were. You know that something is truly and grossly wrong when you are heartily endorsed by your parents.
You never cut school again?
I did, but I made sure that it was never excessive. Her showing trust in me worked in the way she wanted. I think that showing trust, rather than trusting, is a more sensible course to take.
Do you think trust on surface is better than genuine trust?
I have been noticing lately that we can't really hide our true feelings. When you don't mean what you are saying, it shows.
Especially you. It's written all over your face.
Our ability varies in detecting the discrepancy between what comes out of a person's mouth and what is on her/his mind.
Some of us are quite gullible and never lose that quality even as we age.
It then becomes liability... I happen to be highly allergic to people telling me one thing when it is obvious that they are thinking another.
Isn't it just that you are paranoid and in constant search of evil?
You will be surprised how much dishonesty goes around, particularly in the workplace.
What about calling it diplomacy, instead of dishonesty?
Diplomacy is an art, whereas dishonesty is deception! When we are diplomatic, we let the other party know that our true intentions are different from what we tell them.
It is diplomacy, because it is your intention to alert them that what you say is not exactly what you think, and you know that they know it? And, they know that you know that they know it?
Bravo, comrade! I am of the opinion that something similar holds for trust as well. Remember my claim that showing trust is important? First of all, it is of no use if the party you want to trust does not know that you trust them. Second, we can show that our trust is not entirely unconditional. It is possible to allude to the degree of your trust by giving a whiff of your contingency plan.
That coaxes the other party act in the way you want them to?
It will not work all the time, but it would at least put moral pressure in most cases. It is most effective if people involved do not have fixed ideas about or any stake in the issue.
I still don't understand why conditional trust is better than unconditional.
It is more realistic, and hence gives credibility to the claim that we trust someone. It acknowledges that the thoughts and the concerns are not identical for all involved and that the difference should not be the basis for retaliation or punishment in the future. In other words, it takes away the pressure to do as trusted.
But I thought that was the whole purpose of trusting!
Perhaps we could say that trust is something like an implicit request based on the information that we possess and the priorities of our own. The party that is trusted has its own set of information and priorities, so they may not wish to do exactly as desired by the other party. When we know that we are trusted by someone, we feel much more obliged to take into account her/his information and priorities as revealed to us.
Trust is a sneaky way of imposing our preferences to others, then!
Showing conditional trust requires skills and work. You have to convey a delicate message---you believe that s/he chooses the option that you prefer most, but you are aware that s/he may not do so.
And that s/he is well capable of pursuing your preferred option.
Conditionality also necessitates careful monitoring, because it means you have to verify the state and choose your strategy accordingly.
Aren't there cases that are not worth our trust at all?
In such cases, we still show trust and be prepared for the very worst.
Is it necessary to pretend that we trust?
We do it for ourselves, for who we are. If we care about civility, that is.
What about unconditional mistrust?
That is easier than conditional trust. You reduce the total number of possible outcomes by ruling out a certain kind, as you do with unconditional trust, but you still need a plan for each undesirable outcome. It remains that unconditional trust is the easiest.
Suppose I think I am perfectly trustworthy, but you indicate subtly that your trust in me is conditional. I am offended that it is so, and breach your trust.
What can I say, that's not clever at all.
It can well happen. You know those vengeful types.
We should certainly take into account what kind of personality we are dealing with. But I'm afraid there isn't much we can do, except for tinkering the amount of disclosure of our contingency plan. After all, we count on your understanding that even the most trustworthy persons sometimes make mistakes and that you have your own desires which may clash with ours. Plus, we depend on your knowing that we are aware of such caveats. In other words, we can't do anything about your naïveté which makes you think that you are trustworthy in the absolute.
Adjusting the amount of disclosure, doesn't that also require skills and work?
I told you, plain trust or mistrust is an easy way out.
By the way, did you mean to say that conditional trust is a sign of intelligence and sophistication?
You can put it that way.
I am wondering... Did you intend to tell me that you are good at it?
None of us can perfectly conceal what we believe in.
Or, what we want to believe in. Right?
Posts
