Trust involves a calculable asymmetry of possible harm, while hope does not

Evidence

Trust is related to absence in time and in space. There would be no need to trust anyone whose activities were continually visible and whose thought processes were transparent, or to trust any system whose workings were wholly known and understood. It has been said that trust is “a device for coping with the freedom of others,”30but the prime condition of requirements for trust is not lack of power but lack of full information. — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 84 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

Whoever trusts has to keep control over his own preparedness to accept the risks involved. He must make it clear to himself, if only to reassure himself, that he is not trusting unconditionally but rather within limits and in proportion to specific, rational expectations. It is himself he must curb and control when he puts his trust in someone or something. — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 161 (#expands, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Most trust is unreflective, routinized background assumption rather than calculated risk; Trust arises not from powerlessness but from lack of full information about others. — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 84; Trust is willed action taken despite an information deficit. (+5 more)

Related

• Trust is willed action taken despite an information deficit. (similarity 0.94)
• Trust arises not from powerlessness but from lack of full information about others. (similarity 0.88)
• Trust substitutes knowledge of system structure for unavailable information about others. (similarity 0.88)
• Trust rests on structural system guarantees that relieve individuals of risk assessment (similarity 0.87)
• External trust depends on learning and system cover, not internal structural reasons. (similarity 0.86)
• Most trust is unreflective, routinized background assumption rather than calculated risk (similarity 0.86)
• Familiarity prevents trust from becoming a conscious problem; doubt reopens it. (similarity 0.85)
• Trust requires genuine vulnerability and the partner’s real interest in betraying it (similarity 0.85)
• Trust requires controlling one’s own readiness to accept risk (similarity 0.85)
• Testing trust requires a concrete setting and visible relation to one’s own risk decisions (similarity 0.85)
• Reflexive trust can absorb more uncertainty with less risk (similarity 0.84)
• Trust cannot be demanded but only offered through vulnerability (similarity 0.84)
• Trusting always exceeds available evidence; reasons for trust are retrospective self-justification (similarity 0.84)
• Trust as a distinct social phenomenon emerged only under modern conditions of risk (similarity 0.84)
• Trust is a theory about another’s future performance based on their claims (similarity 0.84)

Broader Connections

• Most trust is unreflective, routinized background assumption rather than calculated risk #complicates (0.70)
• Trust arises not from powerlessness but from lack of full information about others. #corroborates (0.60) — Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity, 84
• Trust requires controlling one’s own readiness to accept risk #expands (0.60) — Niklas Luhmann, Trust and Power, 161
• Trust rests on structural system guarantees that relieve individuals of risk assessment #contradicts (0.60)
• Trust is willed action taken despite an information deficit. #corroborates (0.55)