quote:

I'm talking about the decision to trust prior to relationships forming. As in allowing a person to come into your life to begin with..when there aren't necessarily reasons not to trust that person.

quote:

but the "prior" is often influenced because of thinsg that happened in the past.
It is indeed not fair to judge "a new"person based on issues of the past.
But that is how we often work....we learn and try to prevent things to happen again.

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

I wonder if our brains are really more developed than our hunter ancestors, that their brains were primative, and if our genes are all that much different. But I do agree we have developed superior facilites as perhaps a result of more complex socialization.

agree

would an Sumerian child brought through time to today and raised be any different than any other child

i think we are following a dual evolutionary path , social/mental and physical

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

I wonder if our brains are really more developed than our hunter ancestors, that their brains were primative, and if our genes are all that much different. But I do agree we have developed superior facilites as perhaps a result of more complex socialization.

agree

would an Sumerian child brought through time to today and raised be any different than any other child

i think we are following a dual evolutionary path , social/mental and physical

Yes, I think you are correct. Go back further than Sumeria. Take a very young child from a pre-agricultural age, less than a month of age, and transport him/her into contemporary society. I speculate there would be little difference in development compared to the same contemporary cohort.

You are probably familiar with the concept of memes developed by Richard Dawkins as the basis for the evolution and transmission of cultural values down through the generations. Cultural and social concepts selected out in the various strata of society, passed along and evolving generation to generation parallel to genetic evolution or an extention of genetic evolution.

Trust is a cultural value, a meme, with a "good" marker because it promotes social cohesion, and so it seems to be our default mode. Ya think?

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Yes, I think you are correct. Go back further than Sumeria. Take a very young child from a pre-agricultural age, less than a month of age, and transport him/her into contemporary society. I speculate there would be little difference in development compared to the same contemporary cohort.

You are probably familiar with the concept of memes developed by Richard Dawkins as the basis for the evolution and transmission of cultural values down through the generations. Cultural and social concepts selected out in the various strata of society, passed along and evolving generation to generation parallel to genetic evolution or an extention of genetic evolution.

Trust is a cultural value, a meme, with a "good" marker because it promotes social cohesion, and so it seems to be our default mode. Ya think?

i am failure with the meme concept

i think the beginning of agriculture was beginning of out current stage of mental/social evolution with a spurt during the enlightenment now were on whirlwind climb

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Yes, I think you are correct. Go back further than Sumeria. Take a very young child from a pre-agricultural age, less than a month of age, and transport him/her into contemporary society. I speculate there would be little difference in development compared to the same contemporary cohort.

You are probably familiar with the concept of memes developed by Richard Dawkins as the basis for the evolution and transmission of cultural values down through the generations. Cultural and social concepts selected out in the various strata of society, passed along and evolving generation to generation parallel to genetic evolution or an extention of genetic evolution.

Trust is a cultural value, a meme, with a "good" marker because it promotes social cohesion, and so it seems to be our default mode. Ya think?

i am failure with the meme concept

i think the beginning of agriculture was beginning of out current stage of mental/social evolution with a spurt during the enlightenment now were on whirlwind climb

I do not mean to highjack your thread into an anthropological discourse so feel free not to reply and then I will give you the courtesy of withdrawing. It occurs to me that if nomadic pre-agricultural clans formed bonds of mutual protection and trust they must have had both the cranial capacity and somewhat similar social value that we have today for those two concepts. I would venture the guess you could take a clansman from that day and teach him if at a young age to play whatever modern sport his physic permits as an example or teach him to drive a car and eat in a restaurant in a mannerly way and especially teach him more complex language syntax because he has the mental capicity. We are only speaking of 10 to 12 thousand years ago after the beginning of this current deglaciation. Not such a long time for evolution.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Trust comes from having a sufficient history with the other person, seeing that they do what they promised, that their word is their bond. It is earned in increments.

Does he show up for the first meet 20 minutes late with no phone call? No trust earned.
Does he get there a few minutes ahead so as to be where he said he would be? Small amount of trust earned.
Does he call when he says he will? More trust earned. And so on.

You prove yourself trustworthy by keeping your word. It really is that simple.

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

ORIGINAL: vincentML

Yes, I think you are correct. Go back further than Sumeria. Take a very young child from a pre-agricultural age, less than a month of age, and transport him/her into contemporary society. I speculate there would be little difference in development compared to the same contemporary cohort.

You are probably familiar with the concept of memes developed by Richard Dawkins as the basis for the evolution and transmission of cultural values down through the generations. Cultural and social concepts selected out in the various strata of society, passed along and evolving generation to generation parallel to genetic evolution or an extention of genetic evolution.

Trust is a cultural value, a meme, with a "good" marker because it promotes social cohesion, and so it seems to be our default mode. Ya think?

i am failure with the meme concept

i think the beginning of agriculture was beginning of out current stage of mental/social evolution with a spurt during the enlightenment now were on whirlwind climb

I do not mean to highjack your thread into an anthropological discourse so feel free not to reply and then I will give you the courtesy of withdrawing. It occurs to me that if nomadic pre-agricultural clans formed bonds of mutual protection and trust they must have had both the cranial capacity and somewhat similar social value that we have today for those two concepts. I would venture the guess you could take a clansman from that day and teach him if at a young age to play whatever modern sport his physic permits as an example or teach him to drive a car and eat in a restaurant in a mannerly way and especially teach him more complex language syntax because he has the mental capicity. We are only speaking of 10 to 12 thousand years ago after the beginning of this current deglaciation. Not such a long time for evolution.

i'm speaking about the acceleration in the rate of change increaseing after agriculture became the main source of food

giving more free time being able to remain in one place

quote:

ORIGINAL: sexyred1

quote:

ORIGINAL: DesFIP

Trust comes from having a sufficient history with the other person, seeing that they do what they promised, that their word is their bond. It is earned in increments.

Does he show up for the first meet 20 minutes late with no phone call? No trust earned.
Does he get there a few minutes ahead so as to be where he said he would be? Small amount of trust earned.
Does he call when he says he will? More trust earned. And so on.

You prove yourself trustworthy by keeping your word. It really is that simple.

Completely agree with this. I don't trust anyone upfront; actions speak louder than words and time and time again, I have seen this fail. Also, once someone you have trusted breaks that trust, you may be able to forgive that, but not really forget.

And the second time someone breaks your trust, it is pretty much gone.

I always say this; if someone hurts you the first time, it is their fault. If they hurt you after that, it is your own fault for letting them continue to hurt you.

Trust can be earned back but only if the other person really does something about it; otherwise, forget it.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19

I think as newborn babies we have nothing but trust as we do not have the ability to do anything but be kept alive through our caretakers. Those of us who are cared for relatively well, trust. Those who suffered abuse, less so. Most of do end up with a general mostly trusting nature with a few bings and bangs to our pyche. Our "issues". as children, even if highly abused have a yearning for love, attention and the need to want to be able to trust someone.

So I think we end up mostly trusting. Some of us become more guarded, some of us keep on keeping on. Some are niave and stay that way by choice. Some develop a hard shell or at least a method to weed out those with character, and those without.

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

ORIGINAL: lusciouslips19

I think as newborn babies we have nothing but trust as we do not have the ability to do anything but be kept alive through our caretakers. Those of us who are cared for relatively well, trust. Those who suffered abuse, less so. Most of do end up with a general mostly trusting nature with a few bings and bangs to our pyche. Our "issues". as children, even if highly abused have a yearning for love, attention and the need to want to be able to trust someone.

So I think we end up mostly trusting. Some of us become more guarded, some of us keep on keeping on. Some are niave and stay that way by choice. Some develop a hard shell or at least a method to weed out those with character, and those without.

as new born humans we have potential both biologically and as part of the society and that is the gist of what i'm saying

that potential has been increasing as we evolved physically and socially

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

now i want to trust, completely. so i do.

some people seem to have a need to trust, could that in some be a submissive trait?

quote:

ORIGINAL: lexey

quote:

ORIGINAL: osf

quote:

now i want to trust, completely. so i do.

some people seem to have a need to trust, could that in some be a submissive trait?

That, in some, could be a submissive trait. However, that, in some, could be an unsubmissive trait.

That, in anyone, could be anything.

When it comes to trust, I've found it best to never define. Or expect. Just observe.

quote:

ORIGINAL: WinsomeDefiance

I have this theory, that the reason we trust - is because that on some level, deep down...we are all self-harming masochists....maybe?

quote:

ORIGINAL: littlewonder

I don't do the whole trust issue. I just take them for who they are. I know that they will let others down, they will do things that may upset others, etc..

I expect them to be human beings with frailties, egos, problems, imperfections.

quote:





People are/ can be dirt bags, I don't see it as a big deal. If lying, cheating and stealing is all that I need to worry about. I'll have an absence of worry in my life.What's the worst case? Hurt my feelings, lose some 'stuff'..? Better off to keep in mind where my  shoes are.


_____________________________

PEACE

(in reply to osf)

quote:

I see trust as a con job, perpetuating the idea that there needs to be prior conditions in order to have a fulfilling connection with someone.