{"title":"Migrations of Trust: Reasonable Trust and Epistemic Transgressions.","authors":"Duška Franeta","doi":"10.1007/s10746-022-09651-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Despite an immense amount of literature on the topic of trust, there is still no account that offers a plausible epistemological framework for the phenomenon of reasonable trust. The main claim of this article is that reasonable trust and distrust are phenomena based upon practical knowledge, while non-reasonable trust and distrust result from dislocation of trust into different epistemic regimes. This dislocation can be observed in some of the influential theories such as cognitive and emotional accounts of trust and in the accounts understanding trust as a form of faith. Added to that, theoretical approaches introducing a strong idea of basic trust preclude observing the difference between reasonable and non-reasonable trust. In this article, I argue that reasonable trust is founded upon practical knowledge which includes knowledge of integrity of the trusted person and knowledge about a similarity of worldviews of the trust giver and the trust receiver. Furthermore, I elaborate on the ways reasonable trust and distrust are being transformed and disfigured in other epistemic regimes. Drawing mainly upon Aristotelian understanding of practical knowledge, I want to show how non-reasonable trust and distrust are manifested in the phenomena of blind trust, unconditional trust and absolute doubt and explain why non-reasonable trust and distrust can hardly be distinguished from loyalty, subordination, infatuation or calculation.</p>","PeriodicalId":13027,"journal":{"name":"Human Studies","volume":"45 4","pages":"719-738"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9676884/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10746-022-09651-5","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Despite an immense amount of literature on the topic of trust, there is still no account that offers a plausible epistemological framework for the phenomenon of reasonable trust. The main claim of this article is that reasonable trust and distrust are phenomena based upon practical knowledge, while non-reasonable trust and distrust result from dislocation of trust into different epistemic regimes. This dislocation can be observed in some of the influential theories such as cognitive and emotional accounts of trust and in the accounts understanding trust as a form of faith. Added to that, theoretical approaches introducing a strong idea of basic trust preclude observing the difference between reasonable and non-reasonable trust. In this article, I argue that reasonable trust is founded upon practical knowledge which includes knowledge of integrity of the trusted person and knowledge about a similarity of worldviews of the trust giver and the trust receiver. Furthermore, I elaborate on the ways reasonable trust and distrust are being transformed and disfigured in other epistemic regimes. Drawing mainly upon Aristotelian understanding of practical knowledge, I want to show how non-reasonable trust and distrust are manifested in the phenomena of blind trust, unconditional trust and absolute doubt and explain why non-reasonable trust and distrust can hardly be distinguished from loyalty, subordination, infatuation or calculation.
期刊介绍:
Human Studies is an international quarterly journal dedicated primarily to take forward and enlarge the dialogue between philosophy and the human sciences. Therefore the journal addresses theoretical and empirical topics as well as philosophical investigations in different areas of the human sciences. Phenomenological perspectives and hermeneutical orientations, broadly defined, are the primary focus and frame for published papers. The journal benefits from scholars working in a variety of fields and who seek a forum to address these issues, in order to bridge the gap between philosophical and other modes of inquiry in the human sciences. Considering this as the main conceptual aim of Human Studies its wide-ranging interdisciplinary coverage includes contributions from sociology, philosophy, psychology, political science, communication studies, social geography, anthropology, history, and qualitative social research (especially ethnomethodology). A particular accent is set upon communication possibilities between these different perspectives. Thus, interdisciplinary approaches using phenomenology as starting point and reference in trying to analyze and explain the social reality are encouraged and welcome. Both established lines of interpretation and contemporary questions can be used either as basis or subject-matter. Human Studies is the official journal of the Society for Phenomenology and the Human Sciences (SPHS).