Search the Community

As always, the philosopher in me is trying to figure out the building blocks to human existence. This time, I started thinking that "if only had I a group of trustees, which I could do things together with; then, we could probably solve just about any issue we put our minds and hands to." A sort of 'power in numbers' thing, only without becoming a mindless mass movement. Maybe the problem with human society is that our way of deciding to what extend each person and group are trust-worthy is just not correct? I'm not talking about having some centralized power deciding mechanism that declares who should be trusted with what. I mean that we just don't have the science of trust popular and based enough, so that we all could stop putting our trust in repeatedly corrupt & unreliable public representatives and misinforming media groups that broadcast, so called, news? I know that there is a lot of conversation about transparency and how it would solve this trust issue; but, I just don't see how that answers this problem. Transparency is one of those things that can mean too many things. Just because someone is being honest and transparent, doesn't mean that they should be trusted with anything. Do we need a well tested and ever-evolving scientific system of how trust can be applied successfully?