Monday, November 10, 2008


A recent issue of trust and losing it has made me aware just how personal I take the concept of Trust. Friendships, relationships, interactions of many kinds are based on the mutual use of trust. When the trust is not mutual, the relationship can suffer. As it has for me recently.

That I feel I have done nothing to justify losing their trust, their trust in me has diminished. And because I feel I did not deserve to lose their trust, my trust in them has taken a hit. The whole idea of trust has been dealt a blow from both sides now. There is indeed something to the idea that if you cannot trust me enough to even tell me why you do not trust me, then it makes me wonder how far I should be trusting you.

Lack of communication

It would seem that by not communicating we have both allowed this negative crap to invade our friendship, our relationship, whatever it is we have between us. I am guilty here for sure. I haven't aired my concerns or questions. But I never withheld my trust. Now I find out you have. Or maybe I just percieve it.

My question is this. Should I reciprocate? I mean, without bringing it up for us to chew on together, should I also withhold my trust in you now?

Obviously I should not if I feel there is anything worth salvaging. I should not if I consider regaining your trust is of any importance to me. The ball is in my court. What should I do I wonder?

I have been chewing on this more than I should I guess. I cannot force someone to trust me. I cannot fix it if I have no clue why it happened in the first place. Yes, a distance has come between us. But why it seeped into and spoiled the trust we had indicates the result has been more profound for you than me.

This is an odd post I almost did not post. But this blog is a vehicle I use to find my way through thorny issues besides the normal drivel I usually come up with. Since beginning this blog I have found that writing about Life's oddities and concerns makes the process of understanding where I have been and where I am going a bit easier to comprehend. And yeah, I could have just written this and left it unpublished. But I didn't. I needed to get back on the blogging horse and this post is the one I am using for that purpose.


PresterJohn said...

Crummy,if ya want hit me on my email ... (at) gmail (dot) com .........


BBC said...

Tough one, a lot of people have taught me not to trust them. I remain more or less casual friends with them but I depend on them for nothing.

And I've gotten to where I trust very few women. Anyway, decent out today so back to work in the yard.

Demeur said...

I think it depends on who you're talking about a friend or family member or relative. We tend to be more forgiving of those closest to us but even then it becomes a matter of consistency. I've know many a family who's written off a member.
Sometimes it's a simple misunderstanding while other times it's a friendship ending experience. I'd say if this is the first time then give it another shot. If not then walk away.

Dawn on MDI said...

I think open communication is the only thing that is going to help the situation, and then only if it is done very carefully and both parties are willing. It is touchy stuff. If you can both agree to meet halfway, maybe you can work out whatever went wrong. But retreating and pouting on either side doesn't strike me as terribly productive for the healing process. Trust takes years to build and moments to lose. If it is worth salvaging - and that is a call only you can make - you'll find a way to gently work this out. Good luck.

PipeTobacco said...

Mr MaCrum:

My opinion is that you should examine basic "game theory". This is the concept sometimes also called the "Hawk/Dove" strategy. It is an ethological model for judging the value of various forms of reciprocal interactions and might be something you find useful. The concepts of trusting/not trusting are part and parcel of the biological basis of Game Theory.

If my take on what you have written is accurate, you likely will find it most useful to adopt the "modified tit-for-tat" strategy in your own situation. This modified tit-for-tat strategy suggests the most beneficial way for you to respond to an interaction of this nature is to "trust" one time, but if your trust is not reciprocated, that the following interactions should be a reflection of the behavior of the individual you are interacting with.

In your scenario, your reaction would depend upon if this is the first time you have experienced the "trust" issue with the person you are speaking of. If it is, then likely you will have a better outcome if you go the extra mile and make a concerted effort to trust/forgive this person this one time to attempt to bring the relationship back into balance, but if it is not successful, future interactions should be of a kind and nature that reflects what the other participant is doing... ie if he/she is ignoring you, ignore them back.

This is the only advice I can give that is based on biological ideas and theory. It may prove helpful. But then again, another key factor is how much you value this other individual. If it is a relationship of significant value, that may influence how many times it is worthwhile to "try".