Ordinary trust is narrowly scoped while love-based trust spans broadly

Evidence

For the ordinary trust relationship, such as in an iterated prisoner’s dilemma or exchange or in a trust game interaction over a relatively narrowly defined range of issues, you and I might share limited interests and might not genuinely care much about each other’s general welfare, but we can still trust each other because we need each other’s contributions to some common effort or production. In this case our interests are weakly shared through the causal effects of our efforts on our joint good. For the lover and the parent, the interests of the other are much more strongly shared: they are directly included in the parent’s or lover’s own interests to some substantial extent because the lover and the parent care directly about the general welfare of the other. Therefore, the other has strong reason for trusting. The range of matters of concern to the lover or parent is typically very broad; for the ordinary trust relation, it is typically narrowly defined. — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 661

Categorization

• DEFINE: Sharp contrast between ordinary instrumental trust (narrowly scoped, weakly shared interests) and love trust (broad, interests directly included) — the two poles of the encapsulation theory.
• XREF: The narrow-to-broad spectrum of trust scope maps directly onto the reader’s Saramago frame: the wife’s broad love-based trust stands against the narrowly instrumental (and collapsing) trust of the blind internees.