thats the theory we accept i think yes
in reverse I think it looks different than it happened though
as if tradition is remants of society trying to explain something they didn’t understand in the first place…
the individual passes stories that aren’t scientific but they makes sense to the individual…

but society moves in a scienctific direction nonetheless

Trust, or rather “Social Trust” I think is not the tit for tat build up of trust in the sense we are used to understanding it.  We want trust to mean something about the individual that weighs and predicts another individuals intent with less emphasis on accidental default and more weight towards the other individuals morality.
Social trust though, individual vs group or group vs group etc., seems to have more to do with predictability and stability in terms of consensus, or in other words “equilibrium”. To get a society to “trust” it seems it is much more attached to certain possibilities that make it highly unlikely or even impossible for the other parties to defect.

This kind of trust is not immediately identifiable as trust or the root cause of it, but upon further inquiry it should be quite easy to levate.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s