Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
Share Re16-NOTES.pdf
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Share to email
Share to Facebook
Share to X
Or
Re16-NOTES.pdf
(The below text version of the notes is for search purposes and convenience. See the PDF version for proper formatting such as bold, italics, etc., and graphics where applicable. Copyright: 2022 Retraice, Inc.)
Re16: Trust is a Response
Retraice^1
On ways of thinking about trust.
Air date: Wednesday, 2nd Mar. 2022, 5:45 PM Eastern/US.
Go read the Re15 pdf notes
Recall from Re15^2 that I mentioned some `guys', left unnamed. They're named and cited in the notes (Lippmann, Bernays, Chomsky). There is also a lot of good stuff about trust in the notes that wasn't in the segment.
Where is a good, clean, useful, non-crap way of thinking about trust?
I went looking for a good way of thinking about trust and didn't find it. What I did find is that trust is surprisingly neglected in philosophy, but it rears its head in lots of other places (see the citations in the Re15 pdf notes).
Tests--the bridge model
I think you should think in terms of tests. Imagine knowing absolutely nothing about bridges and then having to decide whether to walk across one. You know about falling, but not bridges. You put one foot on, see what happens. You watch someone else walk across, which is a good way to test the bridge (if morally questionable).
A test is an interaction with the environment wherein you think you know what the outcome should be and then you observe what the outcome actually is. If your expectation^3 lines up with the real observation (reality?^4), that part of the world passed the test you were running on it--whether you knew you were running a test or not.
If you run the right kinds of tests, the right number of tests, in the right situations--all of which can vary and affect the quantity or quality of trust--you'll have some kind of trust at the end.
Physical trust
It's also probably true that there are physical foundations to trust that dictate what trust is and can be. Biological organisms are a very physical thing. Trust might not be (only) memories. Babies don't have memories in the way kids and adults do; but they do something akin to trusting.
Our trust and yours
Trust is a response: It's not a trait, it's a state. It's very circumstantial, but that doesn't mean it's very temporary--it can last for decades.
If you want to know what's going on out there (this is what Retraice is all about), trust is essential. So, as a business, we first need to go find out what's going on out there (which requires careful understanding and use of trust, a methodology). And then, once we have valuable information, we have to cause a trust response in our audience in order to deliver it. We care supremely about trust, as a business, because without it we're nothing.
References
Gefter, A., & Hoffman, D. (2016/04/25). The case against reality. The Atlantic. Previously published in Quanta. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/04/the-illusion-of-reality/479559/ Retrieved 31 Oct 2020.
Hoffman, D. (2019). The Case Against Reality: Why Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN: 978-0393254693. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0393254693 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0393254693 https://lccn.loc.gov/2019006962
Retraice (2020/09/07). Re1: Three Kinds of Intelligence. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re1 Retrieved 22nd Sep. 2020.
Retraice (2020/11/25). Re15: Trust and Sources. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re15 Retrieved 28th Feb. 2022.
Russell, B. (1948). Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits. Routledge. First published in 1948. This edition 1992. ISBN: 0415083028. Searches: https://archive.org/search.php?query=Human%20Knowledge%3A%20Its%20Scope%20and%20Limits https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0415083028 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0415083028 https://lccn.loc.gov/94209784
Footnotes
^1 https://www.retraice.com/retraice
^2 Retraice (2020/11/25)
^3 Cf. Retraice (2020/09/07) and Russell (1948) p. 526: "As mankind have advanced in intelligence, their inferential habits have come gradually nearer to agreement with the laws of nature which have made these habits, throughout, more often a source of true expectations than of false ones. The forming of inferential habits which lead to true expectations is part of the adaptation to the environment upon which biological survival depends."
^4 Cf. Gefter & Hoffman (2016/04/25) and Hoffman (2019).
View all episodes
By Retraice, Inc.(The below text version of the notes is for search purposes and convenience. See the PDF version for proper formatting such as bold, italics, etc., and graphics where applicable. Copyright: 2022 Retraice, Inc.)
Re16: Trust is a Response
Retraice^1
On ways of thinking about trust.
Air date: Wednesday, 2nd Mar. 2022, 5:45 PM Eastern/US.
Go read the Re15 pdf notes
Recall from Re15^2 that I mentioned some `guys', left unnamed. They're named and cited in the notes (Lippmann, Bernays, Chomsky). There is also a lot of good stuff about trust in the notes that wasn't in the segment.
Where is a good, clean, useful, non-crap way of thinking about trust?
I went looking for a good way of thinking about trust and didn't find it. What I did find is that trust is surprisingly neglected in philosophy, but it rears its head in lots of other places (see the citations in the Re15 pdf notes).
Tests--the bridge model
I think you should think in terms of tests. Imagine knowing absolutely nothing about bridges and then having to decide whether to walk across one. You know about falling, but not bridges. You put one foot on, see what happens. You watch someone else walk across, which is a good way to test the bridge (if morally questionable).
A test is an interaction with the environment wherein you think you know what the outcome should be and then you observe what the outcome actually is. If your expectation^3 lines up with the real observation (reality?^4), that part of the world passed the test you were running on it--whether you knew you were running a test or not.
If you run the right kinds of tests, the right number of tests, in the right situations--all of which can vary and affect the quantity or quality of trust--you'll have some kind of trust at the end.
Physical trust
It's also probably true that there are physical foundations to trust that dictate what trust is and can be. Biological organisms are a very physical thing. Trust might not be (only) memories. Babies don't have memories in the way kids and adults do; but they do something akin to trusting.
Our trust and yours
Trust is a response: It's not a trait, it's a state. It's very circumstantial, but that doesn't mean it's very temporary--it can last for decades.
If you want to know what's going on out there (this is what Retraice is all about), trust is essential. So, as a business, we first need to go find out what's going on out there (which requires careful understanding and use of trust, a methodology). And then, once we have valuable information, we have to cause a trust response in our audience in order to deliver it. We care supremely about trust, as a business, because without it we're nothing.
References
Gefter, A., & Hoffman, D. (2016/04/25). The case against reality. The Atlantic. Previously published in Quanta. https://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/04/the-illusion-of-reality/479559/ Retrieved 31 Oct 2020.
Hoffman, D. (2019). The Case Against Reality: Why Evolution Hid the Truth from Our Eyes. W. W. Norton & Company. ISBN: 978-0393254693. Searches: https://www.amazon.com/s?k=978-0393254693 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+978-0393254693 https://lccn.loc.gov/2019006962
Retraice (2020/09/07). Re1: Three Kinds of Intelligence. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re1 Retrieved 22nd Sep. 2020.
Retraice (2020/11/25). Re15: Trust and Sources. retraice.com. https://www.retraice.com/segments/re15 Retrieved 28th Feb. 2022.
Russell, B. (1948). Human Knowledge: Its Scope and Limits. Routledge. First published in 1948. This edition 1992. ISBN: 0415083028. Searches: https://archive.org/search.php?query=Human%20Knowledge%3A%20Its%20Scope%20and%20Limits https://www.amazon.com/s?k=0415083028 https://www.google.com/search?q=isbn+0415083028 https://lccn.loc.gov/94209784
Footnotes
^1 https://www.retraice.com/retraice
^2 Retraice (2020/11/25)
^3 Cf. Retraice (2020/09/07) and Russell (1948) p. 526: "As mankind have advanced in intelligence, their inferential habits have come gradually nearer to agreement with the laws of nature which have made these habits, throughout, more often a source of true expectations than of false ones. The forming of inferential habits which lead to true expectations is part of the adaptation to the environment upon which biological survival depends."
^4 Cf. Gefter & Hoffman (2016/04/25) and Hoffman (2019).