Recently, I came across the thought of how important trust is. Most people I've encountered tend to place it at the top of their list of people requirements. That is, generally, above all else, people want their friend, co-worker, family member, or significant other to be a "trustworthy person".
For the most part, I agree with this sentiment. Like many people, I might try to avoid those who are dishonest more often than not; however, I feel like this isn't the most important feature of the person being evaluated. Rather, I think there is a category of trust that is often overlooked - reliability. It may be essential to quickly describe what truth is before we can say someone is truthful and therefore, trustworthy.
The first step is to break truth into categories. By categorizing truth, what we are really doing is defining it. This, while sounding obvious, is where I think most people tend to make a mistake in their assessment. We must avoid mixing the subsets; simply, we cannot make the mistake of assuming that one subset of truth has an intersection with another subset.
We can start by splitting truth up into two categories:
1. Subjective truth - truth that pertains to an individual, group, or species.
2. Objective truth - truth that revolves around existence; a verified or indisputable fact.
From here, I want to split subjective truth into two categories:
1a. Established truth - truth that is based on set events particular to the subject
1b. Dependent truth - truth that is dependent on perceptions or future events particular to the subject
Let's continue with some examples. Using the labels above, I will give an example of each truth using "Person A" and "Person B":
1a - Person A asks Person B what time it is. Person B replies with the correct time. (relevant to location - timezone)
1b - Person A asks for an explanation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Person B explains the theory to Person A (dependent on Person B's understanding)
2 - Person A asks for the formula to calculate force. Person B replies with correct formula (F = ma). (the answer should always be the same)
Continuing with my opening statements - sure, we might be better off avoiding someone who will lie to you about the type 2 truths. But, in reality, you may not find too many people who lie about these truths to begin with. In most cases, you don't necessarily even need to be friends with someone to extract this type of information. When evaluating, I think people tend to look at are the type 1 truths, specifically type 1a. While, both of these truths are important, I would argue that type 1b truths are the most important. These are the truths that cause you to rely on a person, to sincerely consider them trustworthy.
When dealing with type 1b truths, you are depending on an individual to give you information that's validity is entirely in the hands of said individual. The risk here is that the information may be considered truth initially yet, fall short on its dependencies over time. In these cases, it's sometimes difficult to fault the person who failed as the falsehood may not have been intentional. In my experience, many people don't worry about this type of truth when making friends; often, one might simply label someone as unreliable or indecisive and let it go. I find it strange, this is a highly sought after quality in business yet, among friends it's negligible? I think this idea is definitely worth some heavy contemplation as you analyze your relationships.
From here, I think I could manage two more blog posts on type 1b alone; manipulation of the truth, recognizing it, labeling a person trustworthy, etc. However, this might be a good stopping point to avoid endless tangents. The other types have heavy implications as well and each could manage a post or two also. I think it's worth noting that it's often the case that if you have trouble trusting people in this way (type 1b), it might be because you yourself are not trustworthy in this way. That being said, it would be a mistake to fault yourself because you are disappointed often. Understanding this concept, a rather straightforward one at that, can make a significant difference in your decisions and success so, it might be worth a little reflection. I'll end this post on that note and, as usual, any questions, comments and/or suggestions are appreciated.
1. Subjective truth - truth that pertains to an individual, group, or species.
2. Objective truth - truth that revolves around existence; a verified or indisputable fact.
From here, I want to split subjective truth into two categories:
1a. Established truth - truth that is based on set events particular to the subject
1b. Dependent truth - truth that is dependent on perceptions or future events particular to the subject
Let's continue with some examples. Using the labels above, I will give an example of each truth using "Person A" and "Person B":
1a - Person A asks Person B what time it is. Person B replies with the correct time. (relevant to location - timezone)
1b - Person A asks for an explanation of Plato's Theory of Forms. Person B explains the theory to Person A (dependent on Person B's understanding)
2 - Person A asks for the formula to calculate force. Person B replies with correct formula (F = ma). (the answer should always be the same)
Continuing with my opening statements - sure, we might be better off avoiding someone who will lie to you about the type 2 truths. But, in reality, you may not find too many people who lie about these truths to begin with. In most cases, you don't necessarily even need to be friends with someone to extract this type of information. When evaluating, I think people tend to look at are the type 1 truths, specifically type 1a. While, both of these truths are important, I would argue that type 1b truths are the most important. These are the truths that cause you to rely on a person, to sincerely consider them trustworthy.
When dealing with type 1b truths, you are depending on an individual to give you information that's validity is entirely in the hands of said individual. The risk here is that the information may be considered truth initially yet, fall short on its dependencies over time. In these cases, it's sometimes difficult to fault the person who failed as the falsehood may not have been intentional. In my experience, many people don't worry about this type of truth when making friends; often, one might simply label someone as unreliable or indecisive and let it go. I find it strange, this is a highly sought after quality in business yet, among friends it's negligible? I think this idea is definitely worth some heavy contemplation as you analyze your relationships.
From here, I think I could manage two more blog posts on type 1b alone; manipulation of the truth, recognizing it, labeling a person trustworthy, etc. However, this might be a good stopping point to avoid endless tangents. The other types have heavy implications as well and each could manage a post or two also. I think it's worth noting that it's often the case that if you have trouble trusting people in this way (type 1b), it might be because you yourself are not trustworthy in this way. That being said, it would be a mistake to fault yourself because you are disappointed often. Understanding this concept, a rather straightforward one at that, can make a significant difference in your decisions and success so, it might be worth a little reflection. I'll end this post on that note and, as usual, any questions, comments and/or suggestions are appreciated.
No comments:
Post a Comment