Predictable regularity of behavior does not amount to trust
Evidence
Continuity of the relationship is not enough, of course, because the commitments matter. In a favorite philosopher’s example, Immanuel Kant’s neighbors may have relied on his punctuality in his morning walk to set their own schedules. To trust him, however, would require more: that they rely on his having their interests at heart in deciding when to take his walk. If they could not think he did, they could not be said to trust him in the strong sense of the encapsulated-interest account (Baier 1986, 234). — Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, 75
Categorization
Category: Definitional Content
- SHARE: The Kant punctuality example is a crisp, self-contained illustration of regularity versus genuine trust worth trading with someone interested in trust theory or Hardin.
Related
- Relying on another’s regular habit is not trusting in the strong sense. (similarity 0.89)
- Trust is at issue precisely when behavior is confidently predictable (similarity 0.80)
Broader Connections
- Whether disappointment depends on one’s own behavior distinguishes trust from mere confidence
#expands(0.85) — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 1382 - Confusing familiarity with trust causes analytical error
#expands(0.82) — Diego Gambetta, Trust - Making and Breaking Cooperative…, 1334