Migrations of Trust: Reasonable Trust and Epistemic Transgressions

被引:0
作者
Duška Franeta
机构
[1] University Union,Faculty of Law and Business Studies dr Lazar Vrkatić
来源
Human Studies | 2022年 / 45卷
关键词
Trust; Reasonable trust; Practical knowledge; Integrity; Aristotle;
D O I
暂无
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:719 / 738
页数:19
相关论文
共 50 条
[21]   Collective Knowledge and Epistemic Trust. The Approach of Social Epistemology [J].
Baurmann, Michael .
KOLNER ZEITSCHRIFT FUR SOZIOLOGIE UND SOZIALPSYCHOLOGIE, 2010, :185-+
[22]   To Trust or Not To Trust [J].
Heming Huang .
校园英语, 2018, (44) :255-255
[23]   Reasonable Trust through Deliberative Engagement: The Cases of Vaccines and Genome Editing [J].
Feeney, Oliver .
SOCIAL EPISTEMOLOGY, 2022, 36 (01) :111-116
[24]   Trust, Attachment, and Mindfulness Influence Intimacy and Disengagement During Newlyweds' Discussions of Relationship Transgressions [J].
Khalifian, Chandra E. ;
Barry, Robin A. .
JOURNAL OF FAMILY PSYCHOLOGY, 2016, 30 (05) :592-601
[25]   To trust, or not to trust: Cognitive reflection in trust games [J].
Corgnet, Brice ;
Espin, Antonio M. ;
Hernan-Gonzalez, Roberto ;
Kujal, Praveen ;
Rassenti, Stephen .
JOURNAL OF BEHAVIORAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ECONOMICS, 2016, 64 :20-27
[26]   How the EU AI Act Seeks to Establish an Epistemic Environment of Trust [J].
Ho, Calvin Wai-Loon ;
Caals, Karel .
ASIAN BIOETHICS REVIEW, 2024, 16 (03) :345-372
[27]   In Trust We Trust [J].
Miller, Keith W. ;
Voas, Jeffrey ;
Laplante, Phil .
COMPUTER, 2010, 43 (10) :85-87
[28]   Trust and citizen involvement decisions - Trust in citizens, trust in institutions, and propensity to trust [J].
Yang, Kaifeng .
ADMINISTRATION & SOCIETY, 2006, 38 (05) :573-595
[29]   Banking system trust, bank trust, and bank loyalty [J].
van Esterik-Plasmeijer, Pauline W. J. ;
van Raaij, W. Fred .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BANK MARKETING, 2017, 35 (01) :97-111
[30]   Trust Radius versus Trust Level: Radius of Trust as a Distinct Trust Construct [J].
van Hoorn, Andre .
AMERICAN SOCIOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2014, 79 (06) :1256-1259