We live in a world immersed with rules, laws, and regulations designed to protect its inhabitants. But whom do we protect these inhabitants from? More importantly than whom (potentially inflicts harm upon us) is the justification to which they place behind their actions.
Throughout our lives, we can trust change to be constant. We will continuously develop new and vastly diverse relationships moving forward. How we use the people we choose to surround ourselves with and how they choose to use us lays the foundation and basis of the given relationship. Trust is derived from a level of risk we give to others. As a rule of thumb, we tend to minimize our risks in fear that others will be unable to recognize, comprehend, or appreciate our given perspective. Which is fair isn’t it? We each have exclusive and original stories embodying many unique experiences that have instilled the values and ethics to which we have learned to act upon.
The relationships we forge carry different levels of truth among what we willing choose to share. In regards to truth, as communication is concerned, truth is relative. We as people are fallible and are not perfect. Oftentimes, what is perceived as truth is only an extent of truth’s entirety. We can account and anticipate people to produce behavior that correlates with one’s self-interested goals and ambitions. However, just because we act and behave in accordance with our own self-interest does not mean this behavior is malicious, negative, or potentially hurtful towards others.
As we continue to age, we find ourselves having the opportunity to ripen with maturity, poise, and grace learned from past misfortunes and missed opportunities. Slowly, but ever so consistently, we become deeper and more complex as individuals. Our thoughts broaden, our perspective enhances, and our objective becomes clearer.
As we develop relationships with the people living in our world, a certain level of truth is exposed. The exposure of truth depends on how much we trust a particular person with ourselves. Are we ever 100 percent us in action or conversation as if we were one entity to many miles? Or perhaps, do we ever put forth that same level of truth we speak with when in conversation with our respected, all-knowing, and all-powerful gods? The relationships we have with our peers; co-workers, students, team-members, etc. will not encompass the same deeper level of truth as the relationships we share with family members, spouses and partners, close friends, and so-on. We trust those we view more similarly to us; we surround ourselves with artists who perform in the same genre.
Perhaps the most honest relationships we have (however one-sided they may be) are with our pets. These animals that fill the void provided by indentured servants to provide happiness are the most-trustworthy of adversaries. Pets act as our free psychologists; our paid-friends listening to whatever sermon we preach to them.
However true, or honest, what is said may be; it is never as true, as honest, or as passionate as what is left unsaid. Others’ motives and reasons for their actions aren’t always revealed to us. Abraham Lincoln said, “Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.” Lincoln refers to the subject as a fool according to others’ thoughts, not that the subject is actually a fool. The artistry of thoughts and actions we create will never be understood from the perspective of the on-looker, as it is so wholeheartedly recognized by oneself. We choose what performances or beliefs we deem the world deserving to see.
Dwelling in the sea of one’s subconscious desires and wants is an attempt at heavy bravado that will not remain afloat. Regardless, we can understand that one is to act in accordance with their desires, whether they are perceived as good or evil. These labeled actions are defined on the basis of the perspective of societal norms. With each of us learning behavior through our own experiences, what is normal? What is to be said for the people who aren’t raised innormal situations? And does the interest of one’s survival outweigh the interests of one’s attempt to gain happiness?
We either put ourselves in situations of interest and desire now, or we put ourselves in situations that correspond to the enhancing of our survival. Most people want to be trustworthy, but there are people who couldn’t care less if it’s not in their perceived best interest to be so. For some people, if there isn’t a high-risk for not being trustworthy, there may be outweighing benefits than your offer of trust. We all are guilty of acting in accordance with our priorities; otherwise we wouldn’t put our desires into action. We would let opportunities pass us by, we wouldn’t emphasis the commitments we make of our time, and we wouldn’t have learned anything at all. Successes learn to take advantage of the opportunities they are presented. When one has a definitive sense of what it is they are after, their path becomes clear and unambiguous.
Given a choice, you should trust that people are honest with you. Following a similar system installed to administer justice in this country, people are innocent until they prove themselves to be guilty. Trust is the behavior people exude (specific to the expected and anticipated action) when no one is around them. One way we can preview how people honor us (when they are not in our presence), is to monitor the words they make about others; to us, in the trust they bestow upon us. Whatever research or evidence you may draw, be wary of the impulsive desire to create subjective conclusions (pertaining to others) that match the desire to see people as we wish to see them. Some people may have the best intentions for us, but through our perceived notions of their untrustworthiness, we don’t grant the opportunity that allows one to prove or disprove their worth to us.