3 ms·

I’ve come to the exact opposite conclusion. We live in a world driven by marketing/advertising, hyper politicalization of all things, dark user patterns, spy-wa

I’ve come to the exact opposite conclusion. We live in a world driven by marketing/advertising, hyper politicalization of all things, dark user patterns, spy-ware, government agendas... Entering any relationship with a default of distrust and allowing trust to be earned seems very prudent in 2017 (and probably any other time period).

thomastjeffery 9y ago
I think we can differentiate between trusting people's words and trusting individuals themselves. The distinction is that people who disagree with us are not out to do us harm. We can disagree and work together. Trust is a nuanced subject, which is the very fact the "Us vs. Them" attitude ignores. If we clump everyone who disagrees with "us" into one group, we turn a prudent critical attitude into blatant distrust. It is important for us to be critical of ideas, but not of people.
- malvosenior 9y ago
  Interesting. Again, I have the polar opposite position. I can trust an idea because I can evaluate it on its own merit. I can’t trust a person because they’re inherently driven by emotion instead of logic. I may trust someone in some capacity but not another. For instance I might trust someone to feed my dog but not invest my money. I also see the problem with “us vs them” with the “us” side of the equation. I’m a unique individual who’s thoughts, wants and needs don’t overlap with any group. To me everyone else is a “them” until I build a personal relationship with them.
  - thomastjeffery 9y ago
    > I also see the problem with “us vs them” with the “us” side of the equation. As someone who is often mischaracterized in a "them" category, I have the same frustrations. For example, my dad, rather often, dismisses real conversation as me being a "liberal", a group which he refuses (possibly cannot) define. Rather than tackle the ideas themselves, he chooses to dismiss them, and, whether he recognizes this fact, uses "Us vs. Them" as a personal excuse. Because this is an instinct, we are all susceptible. I certainly do not want to blindly consolidate individuals into an undefined group, and dismiss their ideas. I would much rather trust a person's ability to have honest perspective that is different from mine, and learn from that perspective.
    - Danihan 9y ago
      At a certain point, other people's ideas just don't matter that much. For someone who has years of expertise, or who has spent decades fine-tuning his or her worldview based on real evidence and life experience... what need to they have of uninformed opinions or debate. At some point, it only slows you down. All that matters is what you can or can't achieve, and that comes down more to persuasion.
      - thomastjeffery 9y ago
        If everyone is as belligerent and stubborn as you seem to be right now, then you are right that it is a waste of time. In my experience, that is not the case, and I benefit from hearing others' perspectives even if they do not persuade me. Some advice: you aren't likely to persuade many by ignoring their viewpoints or dismissing their character by grouping "Them".

thomastjeffery 9y ago

I think we can differentiate between trusting people's words and trusting individuals themselves. The distinction is that people who disagree with us are not out to do us harm. We can disagree and work together. Trust is a nuanced subject, which is the very fact the "Us vs. Them" attitude ignores. If we clump everyone who disagrees with "us" into one group, we turn a prudent critical attitude into blatant distrust. It is important for us to be critical of ideas, but not of people.

malvosenior 9y ago
Interesting. Again, I have the polar opposite position. I can trust an idea because I can evaluate it on its own merit. I can’t trust a person because they’re inherently driven by emotion instead of logic. I may trust someone in some capacity but not another. For instance I might trust someone to feed my dog but not invest my money. I also see the problem with “us vs them” with the “us” side of the equation. I’m a unique individual who’s thoughts, wants and needs don’t overlap with any group. To me everyone else is a “them” until I build a personal relationship with them.
- thomastjeffery 9y ago
  > I also see the problem with “us vs them” with the “us” side of the equation. As someone who is often mischaracterized in a "them" category, I have the same frustrations. For example, my dad, rather often, dismisses real conversation as me being a "liberal", a group which he refuses (possibly cannot) define. Rather than tackle the ideas themselves, he chooses to dismiss them, and, whether he recognizes this fact, uses "Us vs. Them" as a personal excuse. Because this is an instinct, we are all susceptible. I certainly do not want to blindly consolidate individuals into an undefined group, and dismiss their ideas. I would much rather trust a person's ability to have honest perspective that is different from mine, and learn from that perspective.
  - Danihan 9y ago
    At a certain point, other people's ideas just don't matter that much. For someone who has years of expertise, or who has spent decades fine-tuning his or her worldview based on real evidence and life experience... what need to they have of uninformed opinions or debate. At some point, it only slows you down. All that matters is what you can or can't achieve, and that comes down more to persuasion.
    - thomastjeffery 9y ago
      If everyone is as belligerent and stubborn as you seem to be right now, then you are right that it is a waste of time. In my experience, that is not the case, and I benefit from hearing others' perspectives even if they do not persuade me. Some advice: you aren't likely to persuade many by ignoring their viewpoints or dismissing their character by grouping "Them".