[MD] Trust in Philosophy

[Ian Glendinning]

Matt, John,

Trust can be built - extended / tested - by electronic communication
sure, but it needs some basis of trust outside the channel too. (I
often point out that the top layer of the W3C Semantic Web
architecture is "Trust" .... but that's just a record of trust
established - recognizable authority of the source of a packet, etc
....)

But to build real trust, I think you need to see into someone's eyes
(soul) every now and again. But I agree with your essential point more
communication is good, of any kind .... but the problem can be the
"illusion of communication".

Misunderstanding motives is the biggest risk ... as a minimum people
accuse each other of not really trying to debate / agree, or worse.
(And human psychology is ALL about interpreting the motives of
others.)

Anyway, me not trust you John ?
That's a bit strong surely - I was wary of one of your motives in one
exchange - but I don't feel like I don't trust you.

Ian

On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 8:11 AM, John Carl <ridgecoyote at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well, I'm the opposite of you Matt.  I used to disagree but I've since
> changed my mind.
>
> On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 10:31 AM, Matt Kundert <pirsigaffliction at hotmail.com
>> wrote:
>
>>
>> Dave used to suggest as much, and I used to agree.
>>
>>
>
>
>> > Trust doesn't travel by email. Without trust there is no worthwhile
>> debate.
>> > You and Dave (and a few others) need to be in the same room with a
>> > pint of beer (or a poker in hand, maybe, knowing when to put the poker
>> > down).
>> >
>> > Ian
>>
>>
> John:
>
> Trust is built through communication and communication can flow just fine
> through this medium.  It was practically made for it.  In fact, in packet
> programming, "trusted host" has a very well understood meaning.    Any
> medium of communication has its shortcomings but these can always be dealt
> with if the motivation is there.
>
> It's interesting this comes from Ian, because even though he hasn't
> communicated much with me, I trust him because I appreciate his themes,
> memes and ideas.  However, he doesn't trust me for some reason so this issue
> is moot -  dialogue is  impossible if trust doesn't flow both ways.  In
> fact, I'd say it's easier to have a dialogue when there is equal distrust on
> both sides, than when one side is trusting and the other side is not. Me and
> dmb, for instance.   The rules for dialogue under the cloud of evidently
> bilateral distrust are easily understood and followed, but when the trust is
> unequal, there are no real basis for any common protocols at all.
>
> Yer tcp doesn't quite ip, so to speak.
>
> But then, what do I know, I'm just a troll.
>
> John
> Moq_Discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org/md/archives.html
>