I heard a great song by Linkin Park recently.

  • #1
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14
I heard a great song by Linkin Park recently. (yes, I'm bringing up Linkin Park in a philosophy thread, so sue me) Anyway, it had a line that really made me think about the answer. Personally, I'd choose the second option with a couple of exceptions (you have to trust somebody). What do you think?

The line was "Should I trust some and get fooled by phoniness, or should I trust nobody and live in loneliness?

Disclaimer: The author doesn't necessarily agree with all of the opinions stated by the author.

Second Disclaimer: The first disclaimer was for CYA purposes.
 

Answers and Replies

  • #2
DaveC426913
Gold Member
18,978
2,470


Personally, I'd choose the second option with a couple of exceptions (you have to trust somebody). What do you think?
I think that sounds like the first option is what I think.
 
  • #3
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


Yeah, it does.

What I meant to say is that I'd pick somewhat of a middle ground between the two. I'd only trust someone if I were 100% (to a tolerance of .1%) sure that they were worthy of trust.

I probably sound like an idiot right now. Oh well.

Edit: I just realized that you completely ignored the question and instead discredited my answer. Niiiice.
 
  • #4
DaveC426913
Gold Member
18,978
2,470


Yeah, it does.

What I meant to say is that I'd pick somewhat of a middle ground between the two. I'd only trust someone if I were 100% (to a tolerance of .1%) sure that they were worthy of trust.

I probably sound like an idiot right now. Oh well.

Edit: I just realized that you completely ignored the question and instead discredited my answer. Niiiice.
It's pretty late.:zzz:
 
  • #5
Chronos
Science Advisor
Gold Member
11,408
741


Trust is moral relativism. Actions speak louder than words, so listen carefully, observe even more carefully, and draw your own conclusions.
 
  • #6
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Trust is moral relativism. Actions speak louder than words, so listen carefully, observe even more carefully, and draw your own conclusions.
For sure. Its a bit like monopoly with me. I hand out a bunch of trust and confidence to any given person and then let them either make more with it or abuse it till they are out of my trust limit.

Often times when you initially show 100% trust in someone they gain the confidence to earn that trust.

Plus... if you can trust them to misuse your trust... is that trusting them?
 
  • #7
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


if you can trust them to misuse your trust... is that trusting them?
Hmm, trusting that someone will break your trust?

Of course, after a bit of well-delivered reverse psychology...
 
  • #8
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Hmm, trusting that someone will break your trust?

Of course, after a bit of well-delivered reverse psychology...
:rofl: I think that it's close to being a catch 22... or a paradox.
 
  • #9
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


It's close, but luckily it's only a Catch-19. We can handle those.
 
  • #10
DaveC426913
Gold Member
18,978
2,470


It's close, but luckily it's only a Catch-19. We can handle those.
:rofl:
 
  • #11
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


It's close, but luckily it's only a Catch-19. We can handle those.
Interesting. So I can trust you with that?!

Actually I guess I can't hand out equal amounts of trust to just anyone.
That sort of behaviour may result in disaster. You don't trust someone to be able to handle a chain saw without training them how to use it. Trust is a finicky currency.
 
  • #12
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


Trust, to extend your metaphor, is also a currency that is rightfully more guarded than, well, currency.
 
  • #13
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Trust, to extend your metaphor, is also a currency that is rightfully more guarded than, well, currency.
Apparently trust is tied up with currency in a big way. There are "trust" companies and the word trust appears on all American paper currency.

Its a gamble though. When you board an airplane you trust that the pilot knows how to handle the airplane. Sometimes you don't even meet them. You don't see any certificates declaring his/her competency. You only hope the airline company has stringent rules that adhere to the federal regulations concerning the hiring of pilots. You hear about these conditions in the news etc... but you never see any proof that the pilot is a good pilot etc.. But, you trust that everything will be ok. Is that blind trust?
 
  • #14
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


Not quite blind, as the company is bound by law with some stiff penalties if they don't comply, and if there's one thing I trust, it's fear of punishment.

I don't believe that the police force is necessarily on the side of justice, though. I've spent too much time in Spokane for that.
 
  • #15
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Not quite blind, as the company is bound by law with some stiff penalties if they don't comply, and if there's one thing I trust, it's fear of punishment.

I don't believe that the police force is necessarily on the side of justice, though. I've spent too much time in Spokane for that.
I trust you mean Spokane, Washington (state). Spokane is just south of Slocan Valley on the Canadian side. That is great country with a similarity to west coast flora that is uncanny.
 
  • #16
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


Indeed, I speak of the Spokane in Washington. Our police has been lackluster of late... to know more, simply look up "Otto Zehm" or "Brad Thoma".
 
  • #17
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Indeed, I speak of the Spokane in Washington. Our police has been lackluster of late... to know more, simply look up "Otto Zehm" or "Brad Thoma".
Breach of trust going on man!

That's really nothing compared to the RCMP out in Canuck land. We had the Polish immigrant who landed in Vanc and waited 10 hours for his mom who came but couldn't find him. Then about 6 RCMP tasered him to death. Then the constable that was in charge (no pun) of the tasering death whacks the life out of an innocent motorcyclist and kills him with his SUV. The off duty officer leaves the scene with is kids to home where he pounds down 2 vodka then returns to the scene. This was obviously to cover his already over the limit blood alcohol level. He has been charged with obstructing justice while recommendations by local police for a DUI charge have been denied.

Tell your dudes in Spokane they should think about a career with the RCMP where every constable is innocent or suspended with pay.
 
  • #18
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


Wow, we've got nothing on you.

At least the mayor of Spokane is semi-honest. I have a seperate thread praising those virtues of her that are rare in politics.
 
  • #19
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Wow, we've got nothing on you.

At least the mayor of Spokane is semi-honest. I have a seperate thread praising those virtues of her that are rare in politics.
I don't know if I'm being biased but yeah, the Mayor of Surrey is a woman and she is very good at being trustworthy, to a degree. She is spending like a bat out of hell on community events and programs. Vanc's Mayor, on the other hand, is a dork with a flip flop mouth on him like a wind sock at the airport.
 
  • #20
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


Why would you be biased? Unless you're implying that women are better Mayors...
 
  • #21
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Why would you be biased? Unless you're implying that women are better Mayors...
Just a general understanding that women provide for their family/community from a trusted position such as mother/wife/sister and benefactor. While men run amok feeding their male menopause and insatiable appetite for power, recognition and gluttony. Of course this is a fallacious and biased point of view carried by many women and a few men. We may need to do a consensus of cities with mayors who are of each gender to try and establish whether the point of view carries weight or not.
 
  • #22
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


It doesn't.
 
  • #23
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


It doesn't.
Alright then. When we look for trustworthiness in an individual we are not looking for a specific gender nor position in society nor physical features that signal such trustworthiness. What do we look for? Their actions. Not their words. True or false?

Edit: When we look for trustworthiness in an inanimate object... like a log across a stream or the transmission of a vehicle... we don't look for a specific gender but we do look for specific positioning and physical features that suggest a trustworthiness. Then we test the object... with some sort of action to determine how it might perform under our weight or our utilization of the object. Can these same tests apply to individual humans?
 
Last edited:
  • #24
Char. Limit
Gold Member
1,204
14


Part I: Mostly actions, but make sure that their words agree with their actions.

Part II: I'm leery of looking simply for physical characteristics. Inanimate objects don't have free will. Humans do. You need to make sure that they have the physical AND mental ability for a task, as well as the force of will not to slack off.
 
  • #25
baywax
Gold Member
1,940
1


Part I: Mostly actions, but make sure that their words agree with their actions.
Then if they're speaking lower Lactavian all you have is their actions to go by, right?
 

Related Threads on I heard a great song by Linkin Park recently.

Replies
6
Views
674
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • Last Post
3
Replies
70
Views
6K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • Last Post
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
18
Views
11K
  • Last Post
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Last Post
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • Last Post
Replies
6
Views
2K
Top