there's an odd train of thought that's been passing through recently. it goes:
my trust has been broken by someone i believed to be trustworthy.
but this is a different person. a different situation. this person hasn't broken your trust. they are trustworthy.
yes, but that was what i believed about the last person, until they broke my trust.
so how do i know if i can really trust anyone? do i test people before trusting them with important things? do i have some kind of trust gauge that lets me know with what things i can trust someone? should i just never assume i can trust anyone?
the problem with that last thing is that trust is based on a lack of certainty. the trust is the test.
more practically, it's impossible to live a full life without trusting anyone. you can't function the way you're supposed to.
so what do i do with that?
and actually, it gets worse:
well i can trust God.
can i? let's not forget that he has not prevented any of this from happening. what if i were putting my trust into an entity that doesn't even exist?
you've probably realized the problem here. this has nothing to do with me trusting one person or another (although, i'm not totally convinced that i could fully mistrust everyone, even if i put my mind to do so). none of this reasoning has anything to do with the actual trustworthiness of any individual. the problem is my lack of trust in my own judgment. which, while it doesn't automatically change anything, is helpful to realize, as i can now cast myself as the unreliable narrator.
more importantly, it means that i am STILL. ASSUMING. RESPONSIBILITY. for a situation i did not cause and could not have avoided.
except . . . incidentally, by being less trusting?
No comments:
Post a Comment