Trust

[Mike]

I heard the nature of trust described recently like this:

If you're blindly trusting the world and the people in it, you're being naive.

But if you actively and consciously make the decision to trust the world and the people in it, it's not an act of naivety, it's an act of courage. And by having the courage to trust people, you invite them to bring forth the best of themselves. It's kind of a subtle alchemical process.

I like that explantion, and when I heard it I was able to quickly identify some moments in my life when I was being naive and moments when I was being courageous.

Being naive is often more of a conscious choice than we realize, or that we want to realize. Naivete allows us to avoid the responsibility of expanding our awareness. It relieves you of your decision making duties. And it is often the perfect excuse for failure ("I never even saw that coming!") Often people don't see things coming because they don't want to see things coming. At least that's what I've discovered.

So, trust as a conscious choice has some potential for magic. Sure there's the chance you can get burned, but by inviting someone to bring forth their highest nature you create the opportunity for deep connections and progress. Whenever someone has trusted me with something delicate and personal I've always felt immensely honored, and almost duty bound to treat it in a sacred manner.

I'm thinking we should trust more. By offering our unearned trust we give people a sacred opportunity to earn it. And I think most people will rise to that challenge.

[Johan (Keyholder)]

Good subject!

The way I always approached trust is in one of two ways.
First, one can trust someone when that person has "earned" your trust, proven to be trustworthy.
Or second, one can trust someone till that person has demonstrated to be not trustworthy.

I always - and still - choose the second option.

[Mike]

Posted by Johan (Keyholder) (here)
Good subject!

The way I always approached trust is in one of two ways.
First, one can trust someone when that person has "earned" your trust, proven to be trustworthy.
Or second, one can trust someone till that person has demonstrated to be not trustworthy.

I always - and still - choose the second option.

Johan, that was beautifully put! I think that's what I was trying to say there.

[rgray222]

It seems to be that trust is a commitment issue and some people just can't find it in themselves to trust others. Trust is the basis for our 'real' connection to other people, when we trust others we are less lonely, and (I believe) we have a more positive view of the world. Everyone always talks about love and while it is important you can't love someone or even be a good friend without trusting them first. Trust is the starting point in business relationships, without and a strong element of trust you are not going to get into business with a company or person.

I think you hit the nail on the head, consciously deciding to trust someone takes an act of courage. Trust is a little talked about but a critical component of our lives.

[Trisher]

I would trust those folks that are kind towards nature, children and animals. That trust is in their awakened state of Being. Their innate sense of goodness that simply is . It emanates from people and can be sensed.

[Journeyman]

Posted by Mike (here)
I'm thinking we should trust more. By offering our unearned trust we give people a sacred opportunity to earn it. And I think most people will rise to that challenge.

I also like the explanation. These days I have plenty of trust for people on a local basis, many of whom have risen admirably to the challenges of the last year.

I have next to zero for anyone in the highest echelons of government, industry or the media.

Both positions are well founded on the evidence available to me.

[Feritciva]

Source: https://youtube.com/watch?v=6yYchgX1fMw

Always loved this song, the lyrics & the videoclip. Best of Billy Joel. Tells 'trust' way better than I can!

[Mark (Star Mariner)]

Good subject Mike. There's another aspect or tangent to trust, which is faith. On the face of it trust and faith are one and the same, but faith I would say is trust in some higher or 'other' power that, with your heartfelt solicitations, will look out for your best interests. A good example of this might be buying a used car. It's a big and somewhat risky investment, because many dealerships are closed to the general public with the covid restrictions, but are operating online or over the phone. You probably won't get to see the car with your own eyes, much less get to inspect it and give it a test drive.

I'm in the midst of this process right now. I've only spoken to the dealer about the car I'm buying, read the description, run a background check, and seen pictures. But later this week a flatbed transporter truck will deliver it to my door. Only then will I see the car for the first time. I'm parting with several thousand pounds for this, and it's largely on trust/faith. Cross your fingers for me!

[Ewan]

Posted by Johan (Keyholder) (here)
Good subject!

The way I always approached trust is in one of two ways.
First, one can trust someone when that person has "earned" your trust, proven to be trustworthy.
Or second, one can trust someone till that person has demonstrated to be not trustworthy.

I always - and still - choose the second option.

Spot on, exactly the same but with a caveat that if all my alarms are going off the trust doesn't get extended in the first place. Some people are obvious scammers.

[Free Thinker]

Trust is a complicated thing. For a long time (and rightly so!), I have had immense trouble trusting others. I won't go into details, as that's not important, but I have been and still am very recently reevaluating everything I've ever learned or been taught, including those things that have been "self-taught" to me through my own personal experiences and how I chose to view those experiences. It is all too easy to want to say "f**k trust, I can only trust myself". But that is a damaging mindset to have, and will only serve to further alienate and suppress those whom feel that way.

Am I fully there yet in this whole 'trust' debacle? No. I'm not sure such is possible in the human equation. But I can at least try. After all, trying is better than nothing.

I would also add 'discernment' as a key and life-saving factor to the whole idea of trust. And is something I desperately would like to improve upon myself, to know for a fact when someone or something is not trustworthy and SHOULD be avoided, like the vilest of plagues. And what is just my anxiety, fear and/or paranoia talking and is only holding me back from experiencing and living through what might potentially be an extremely healthy relationship, situation, viewpoint, etc. That in and of itself, is a psychological battle all its own, not one for the faint-of-heart.

But I'm trying. No matter how much crap was/is/might still be thrown my way. I've spent far too many years of my life in spiritual darkness to feel otherwise. It's high time for a change for the better.

Edit: Editing/clarifying something I had said above. I would describe the years of "spiritual darkness" I spent/experienced to be more akin to that of "spiritual neutrality" or "spiritual apathy" - to an extent. The door to that left somewhat ajar/open, and not fully closed either. As no matter how bad things got, there was a line there that even then I stubbornly refused to cross.

[Karen (Geophyz)]

I agree that trust is very complicated and is definitely affected by events in your past lives and current life.

I have tried to trust people and so many times it has turned out badly. So now I expect the worst and am pleasantly surprised if I get the best! So now I walk through life very wary of people, but I do trust my animals, and my instincts, children and some of the very old people I know!

[Free Thinker]

Posted by Ewan (here)

Posted by Johan (Keyholder) (here)
Good subject!

The way I always approached trust is in one of two ways.
First, one can trust someone when that person has "earned" your trust, proven to be trustworthy.
Or second, one can trust someone till that person has demonstrated to be not trustworthy.

I always - and still - choose the second option.

Spot on, exactly the same but with a caveat that if all my alarms are going off the trust doesn't get extended in the first place. Some people are obvious scammers.

Agreed. Trust has to be earned.