Do you think people can be trusted?

[shadowfox]

Yes...

as long as you can figure out where he/she draws the line between truth and convenience.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Some of this is why I said 'snap answer'. It's very easy to analyze trust at considerable length, or to rename it at your convenience, but Benjamin summarizes it perfectly. As Hobbes pointed out a third of a millennium ago, without society, the life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. The question is how we create 'social capital', one aspect of which is trust -- and how we destroy it.

A society with a high general level of trust has considerable commercial advantages, in that you don't need a 36-page contract, lawyers and accountants to write a book, if you can trust the other person to do the decent thing. I've written lots of books, often on no more than a verbal agreement, but in the last 20 years, contracts have grown longer and longer and more and more paranoid.

Cheers,

R.

 

[tbarker13]

Being totally honest, I'd have to say that I lean toward not trusting people.

As one of my old J-school profs (a former UPI bigwig) once said - "If your mother says she loves you, check it out."

That said, I'd say that my leaning is only very slight. The world of journalism is a little like police work in this regard - it is quite common to find yourself dealing with people who lie, mislead and twist the truth the suit their own purposes. It teaches you to be cautious.

But really, isn't this a matter of what we are being asked to trust people with? This is a very tough question on which to demand a straight "yes" or "no" answer.
Most of the previous posters were pretty emphatic in their trust of others.
But how many of them would be comfortable loaning a board newcomer $1,000 today on the promise that it would be returned later? How many of them would be willing to send that newbie their spare M4 to play around with for a couple weeks? None, I'm betting.

It's very easy to trust people when there are no consequences for being wrong.

 

[zenlibra]

It's very easy to trust people when there are no consequences for being wrong.

My snap answer was yes, but after reading this thread I lean toward no. I take people at face value and believe people are generally decent, but if anything of value comes into play I have to think about it.

 

[kermaier]

Some of this is why I said 'snap answer'. It's very easy to analyze trust at considerable length, or to rename it at your convenience, but Benjamin summarizes it perfectly. As Hobbes pointed out a third of a millennium ago, without society, the life of man is solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. The question is how we create 'social capital', one aspect of which is trust -- and how we destroy it.

OK, snap answer: No.

I think life these days is becoming more Hobbesian, in the sense that even within many (so-called?) societies it's increasingly dystopian -- and my assumption is that people have a growing tendency to find a way to rationalize their self-serving, anti-social behavior.

A society with a high general level of trust has considerable commercial advantages, in that you don't need a 36-page contract, lawyers and accountants to write a book, if you can trust the other person to do the decent thing. I've written lots of books, often on no more than a verbal agreement, but in the last 20 years, contracts have grown longer and longer and more and more paranoid.

Well, yes and no.
Contracts are a way of creating trust brokered by business law for purposes of a mutually beneficial transaction. When the barriers to direct trust are higher, the brokered trust must be more elaborate.
But contracts are also a way of defining what rights and responsibilities each party has in the event that the deal turns out to be unprofitable. I mean, people may be dependable when things are going well, but when things turn south, people tend to look out for their own interests first and those of their business associates second. This is not necessarily an issue of lack of trust, but simply defining the rules of the game.

::Ari

 

[kxl]

A PERSON can be trusted.

People? NO, for the simple reason that you have to take into account the lowest common denominator.

 

[Roger Hicks]

OK, snap answer: No.

I think life these days is becoming more Hobbesian, in the sense that even within many (so-called?) societies it's increasingly dystopian -- and my assumption is that people have a growing tendency to find a way to rationalize their self-serving, anti-social behavior.



Well, yes and no.
Contracts are a way of creating trust brokered by business law for purposes of a mutually beneficial transaction. When the barriers to direct trust are higher, the brokered trust must be more elaborate.
But contracts are also a way of defining what rights and responsibilities each party has in the event that the deal turns out to be unprofitable. I mean, people may be dependable when things are going well, but when things turn south, people tend to look out for their own interests first and those of their business associates second. This is not necessarily an issue of lack of trust, but simply defining the rules of the game.

::Ari

Dear Ari,

Highlighted portion: yes, in some countries.

Do we all want all countries to be like this and to assume that TINA rules (TINA = There Is No Alternative)?

I'd rather walk away from an unprofitable deal, even if it costs me money, rather than deal with an arsehole. I don't know about the most recent incarnation of Hove Books, but I decided not to sign a contract with them many years ago, and there have been other publishers since.

Not all people are arseholes, unless they chose to be. An earlier post about trustworthy people trusting others, and the untrustworthy not trusting them, certainly resonated with me.

No one is totally trusting all the time. That would be lunacy. But those who never trust anyone -- and indeed, those societies where trust is at lamentably low levels (UK, under 30%; Brazil, under 10%) -- look to me as though they want lives that are solitary, poor, nasty and brutish, if not necessarily short.

Cheers,

R.

 

[bmattock]

Snap answer. Don't think too long about it. Overall, can people be trusted?

Singular, yes. Aggregate, no.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Singular, yes. Aggregate, no.

Dear Bill,

As you normally only deal with them in the singular, what is the aggregate if not a collection of singulars?

Cheers,

R.

 

[kram]

Yes, I trust people. However, when listening to salespeople and politicians, my bulls**t detector is turned up to max 🙂

 

[dee]

Having an invisible dee'sability - Lost girl-child inside - Autism ... GID ...
[ I mean ' my hand ? too high / wide / heavy / ' stretched out ' / wobbly scared lost ]
I was terrified of telling anyone and just tried to copy normal - with no comprehension of how 'real' people work . [ I still don't , but it does not matter ]

However , I found that most were understanding and more than willing to help and support me .
OK , over the years I have been bullied and used , but in the main , it's been good - better that I expected .

If someone rips me off or whatever , it's just a drop in the ocean - unimportant in respect
of those who allow me to be me , wierdness and all .

I thought that people here , with so much experience and being a part of what to me , is a confusing , out of phase world would perceive me as crazy or childish 'cos I fixate on Leica II and Leica likes - and Contax ... but that did not happen . Just as I was welcomed into the establishment by two Leica Dealers with encouragement and support well beyond selling a camera or two .

I have even been gifted with a precious rebuilt Sonnar / J 3 by Brian for my Contax IV ...
Awesome , and the antithesis of the response I anticipated for combining a near scrap Contax with a Kiev 4 top plate .

I had no idea how to respond to [girl]freinds who seemed to like being around me , or had patience with me - being ignored or put down , I could respond to as normal , but this ... ?
I have to say that I have learned to trust - and it's good .

OOPs - long winded again !

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Trust but Verify.

 

[Al Patterson]

Snap answer? Overall, no.

However, upon getting to know more about individual people one can develop trust. It is like respect. It needs to be earned, not just granted because we both exist.

 

[giellaleafapmu]

i trust my dog and he trusts me.

I also trust my two dogs (despite one of them is a rescued theorically vicious Rotweiler mix) and they trust me but unfortunately where I am (South America) I cannot trust human beings and I have a proof and confirmation of this every single day.

Ah, just so that flame does not start: I love the place I am in, I know a lot of lovely South Americans which I trust but in general there are too many persons who cannot be trusted and too high crime rate to answer in a different way.

GLF

 

[bmattock]

Dear Bill,

As you normally only deal with them in the singular, what is the aggregate if not a collection of singulars?

Cheers,

R.

Evidence suggests that individual persons behave significantly differently than when they are members of a crowd. Social behavior is in some ways better and in some ways worse than private behavior.

I trusted a member of RFF some time ago when I sent him some of my LTM lenses for him to play with, and he repaid me by being trust-worthy and returning them. I would not therefore say I would send my LTM lenses to any member of RFF at random. "Pass the Camera" shows that that eventually someone proves less than trust-worthy.

 

[delft]

Roger,
I find comfort in the thought that there is scientific support for the notion that a basic trust, until proven wrong is a superior strategy in situations where mutual trust decides on the outcome of an action. I googled 'tit for tat experiment' and found a.o: http://www2.owen.vanderbilt.edu/Mike.Shor/courses/GTheory/docs/Axelrod.html
Now, the next question is: can scientific experiments be trusted? Be that as it may, I would have been disappointed if a sneaky, no-good, political strategy had come out superior in this experiment.

Greetings,

Dirk

 

[Mephiloco]

I choose to err on the side of believing in the general good of people, within reason. Though it's different than trust, I've been helped many times by then strangers when I was down on my luck, stranded, or what not while the conventional wisdom in those situations was that I was screwed.

 

[35mmdelux]

When I was in the US Army 35 yrs ago I needed to go home to tend to urgent business before shipping out. Earning all of $180 (USD) monthly I was short of cash to cross the country. A guy I hardly knew loaned me the amount to get home and told me to pay him back when I reached my new base. I paid a month later but I never forgot that experience. I've rarely met such a decent person.

 

[Thardy]

Yes, I trust people. However, when listening to salespeople and politicians, my bulls**t detector is turned up to max 🙂

The heart of man is deceitful and beyond cure. Who can understand it?

 

[NIKON KIU]

You should have made this a Poll.
Generally on RFF---> Yes
Some of those other forums---> No

Kidding aside, if there is no trust, society would be a scary place.

Kiu