Philosophy::Trust (social sciences)


Trust::trust    Social::social    Between::foddy    First::journal    In-group::press    Identity::group

Philosophy Some philosophers argue that trust is more than a relationship of reliance. Philosophers such as Annette Baier have made a difference between trust and reliance by saying that trust can be betrayed, whilst reliance can only be disappointed (Baier 1986, 235).<ref>Baier, Annette (1986). Trust and Antitrust. Ethics 96(2): 231-260. Available at</ref> Carolyn McLeod explains Baier's argument by giving the following examples: we can rely on our clock to give the time, but we do not feel betrayed when it breaks, thus, we cannot say that we trusted it; we are not trusting when we are suspicious of the other person, because this is in fact an expression of distrust (McLeod 2006).<ref>McLeod, Carolyn (2006). Trust. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Available at</ref> Thus, trust is different from reliance in the sense that a truster accepts the risk of being betrayed.

The definition of trust as a belief in something or a confident expectation about something<ref>"trust." Online Etymology Dictionary. Douglas Harper, Historian. 25 May. 2013. <</ref> leads to eliminate the notion of risk from the definition, because it does not include whether the expectation or belief is favorable or unfavorable. For example, to have an expectation of a friend arriving to dinner late because she has habitually arrived late for the last fifteen years, is a confident expectation (whether or not we agree with her annoying late arrivals.) The trust is not about what we wish for, rather it is in the consistency of the data of our habits. As a result, there is no risk or betrayal because the data now exists as collective knowledge.

Trust (social sciences) sections
Intro  Sociology  Psychology  Philosophy  Economics  Systems  See also  References  Further reading  External links  

PREVIOUS: PsychologyNEXT: Economics