Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
about something ('welfare'):
I cannot subjectively trust somebody
. These goals could also be
maintenance goals (of a situation, a state), not necessarily achievement goals.
Second, trust itself basically
consists of
(implicit or explicit) beliefs.
The root of trust is
a mental state
, a complex
mental attitude
of an agent
X
towards another
agent
Y
, in context C, about the behavior/action
relevant for the result (goal)
g
X
.
Since
Y
's action is useful to
X
, and
X
is relying on it, this means that
X
is
delegating
to
Y
some action/goal in her own mental plan. This is the strict relation between trust and reliance
and delegation:
Trust is the mental counter-part of reliance and delegation.
5
This mental attitude is based on and consists of
beliefs
(or in general of doxastic represen-
tations
6
), about the trustee and his behavior. And in fact they may be wrong.
X
can have false
(although well grounded and subjectively justified; rational) beliefs about
Y
's qualities, skills,
and behavior. In short, the main beliefs are:
α
i)
X
believes that
Y
is able and well disposed (willing) to do the needed action;
ii)
X
believes that in fact
Y
will appropriately do the action, as she wishes;
iii)
X
believes that
Y
is not dangerous; therefore she will be safe in the relation with
Y
, and
can make herself less defended and more vulnerable.
The first (and the third) family of beliefs is '
evaluations'
about
Y
: to trust
Y
means to have
a good evaluation of him. Trust implies some appraisal.
The second (and the third) family of beliefs is '
expectations'
, that is (quite firm) predictions
about
Y
's behavior, relevant for
X
's goal:
X
both wishes and forecasts a given action
α
of
Y
,
and excludes bad actions; she feels safe.
The basic nucleus of trust - as a mental disposition towards
Y
- is a positive expectation
based on a positive evaluation; plus the idea that
X
might need
Y
's action.
Let us carefully consider these various roles of the beliefs in a trust mental state, and these
two facets of trust: as valuation, as expectation.
2.2.1 Trust as Positive Evaluation
An explicit positive evaluation is a judgment, a belief about the goodness of
Y
for the achieve-
ment of a certain goal. '
Y
is good' actually means '
Y
is good for
' (Miceli & Castelfranchi,
2000). Sometimes we do not specify
for
what
Y
is good, just because it is included in the
very concept of
Y
('This is a good knife/pen/car/
...
'), or because
it is clear in the context of the evaluation ('On which mountain we can do some climbing?'
'That mountain is good!'). These are direct explicit evaluations: '
Y
is good, is OK, is apt, able,
useful', and so on.
The abstract content of these predicates is that:
given the goal g
X
, Y is able to realize it or
to help X in realizing it
(a tool). In other words,
Y
has the
power of
realizing
g
X
.
7
...
mechanic/doctor/father/
...
5
Given this strict relation and the foundational role of reliance and delegation (see Section 2.6) we need to define
delegation and its levels; and to clarify also differences between reliance, delegation, and trust.
6
See Section 2.2.8 on Trust and Acceptance and Chapter 1, note 21.
7
The evaluation of
Y
is about the
internal powers
for
g
X
(internal resources, capabilities, competences, intelligence,
willingness, etc.), but for relying on
Y
for
g
X
external conditions and the control on the external conditions might also
be necessary:
Y
may also have (or not) the
external powers
, the external conditions and resources for realizing
g
X
;
Y
Search WWH ::
Custom Search