?

Log in

No account? Create an account
 
 
09 March 2004 @ 09:23 pm
Trust revisited  
For me trust is an earned commodity, and it is earned in increments. There are degrees of trust.

Someone burned by one in whom they have trusted will, of course, grant those incremental "trust points" with less generosity than one who has never been in a position of having their trust misplaced.

-Sandra


*nod*

Trust is the single most valuable commodity I possess, and is not bestowed lightly. There exists no 'right' to my trust, it is a gift that I may share with others. It is something to be earned, rather than expected.

Unfortunately there are many people in the world who treat 'trust' as commonplace, who take it for granted, or dismiss it's value out of hand *sigh* That sort of behavior is what leads to the less generosity that Sandra mentioned.

'Give people your trust until they break it' Why? Turning the equation around is equally valid. Perhaps more so, really.

Trust also has to do with protection. In the end I am the one who has to protect myself 'cause no one else is going to do it.

-the redhead-
...who knows that pretty words are nothing more than that...
Tags:
 
 
 
Musings from the CZ unitcz_unit on March 10th, 2004 04:43 am (UTC)
'Give people your trust until they break it' Why? Turning the equation around is equally valid. Perhaps more so, really.

Depends on the community and the rate of interaction. If this is a community where trust is commonplace (say a mature bunch of people) then extending trust first is a reasonable idea. You're moderately assured of being returned in kind. If this is a community of immature dolts, then the reverse is probably better.

Interaction: If you are never going to interact with the person again, then the best way to play the game is to defect (not trust). You know this, they know this. If however you are going to interact with this person again in the future, then playing by the standard rules (trust first and give them a chance, then reflect) is the strategy that will work best in the long term.

CZ
-the redhead-theredhead on March 12th, 2004 11:41 am (UTC)
There's a big different between not trusting and defecting. Not trusting is merely the witholding of something, whereas defetice is akin to actively opposing something.

trust first and give them a chance, then reflect This is social trust, which is more politeness than trus (see below in comments)

-the redhead-
Slut Bamwalla, aka Zinglebert Slaptiback: Smitten Foolslutbamwalla on March 10th, 2004 07:01 am (UTC)
'Give people your trust until they break it' Why? Turning the equation around is equally valid. Perhaps more so, really.

And that's the so-called 'Prisoner's Dilemma'. It is always more to your advantage to defect than to trust. This is true in the short-term, and probably true in the long-term as well.

Living that way, though, makes for a very jaded, very lonely life. While I am firmly with Ayn Rand in the belief that there is no true altruism, there are cases when giving a little "unearned" trust and opening yourself up to hurt can be emotionally beneficial to you.

Fate has not yet taught me how to distinguish those cases.
-the redhead-theredhead on March 12th, 2004 11:37 am (UTC)
My response in another community:

I would think that submitting to her every desire isn't necessarily helpful. Try building up her self confidence, and making her feel secure about herself! :) (quoted from another person re: regaining trust)

This may work in some situations, for those who suffer from lack of trust due to low self esteem and/or lack of self confidence.

For many, however, not affording others any form of real trust (as opposed to the polite, every day forms) stems from a practical outlook. Why offer trust to those who have not earned it or do not merit it? Especially if they have abused the privilege in the past? What's the saying? Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me (tho I prefer it in the original redhead - 'Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, prepare to die' *grin*)

Gaining the gift of someone's trust is a process, something to be worked at, something which requires effort. Not something that should be expected under any circumstances. If one has violated another's trust things get even more complicated, for that person has specific reason not to trust. At that point it is a process that goes far beyond saying 'Trust me' or a simple apology. Regaining trust requires work. Hard work. Proof that one is worthy. Actions speak louder than words.

The previous has little to do with the normal, commonplace sort of polite trust. That is more a social lubricant (a good thing!) than the real thing.

-the redhead-