Q & A: How do you really know if you can trust someone?
Q: How can you ever truly know if you can trust someone?
A: This is a question that has come up often recently amongst all age groups and asked by both men and women. In my experience there’s no discrimination when it comes to the issue of trust, we are all vulnerable in this regard, that is until we have established some definite truths in ourselves.
Before you go any further in the analysis of your relationship to trust, clarify something personally, individually, make a note of what trust means to you, what do you mean when you say you trust someone? We’ll continue this thread at the end.
We all know that issues of trust are closely related to two aspects of our personality, the first is our past experiences and how we have interpreted them with respect to what they say about us, and the second is the expectations we put on others based on our hopes and fears. Exploring our personal and unique blue print around this issue by first looking at our personal experiences and then outlining our expectations of those in relation with us, is the perfect starting point. This will give us the data we require to identify our habits and behaviours further when exploring the issue of trust from a much more interesting perspective, that which Gurdjieff referred to as the multiplicity of “I’s,” and that tool which we can all use to identify ourselves and others for who they truly are, “Our Values”.
A good place to start is to assess yourself with respect to trust, how trustworthy are you? Honestly? This will to some extent answer what you can tolerate from others relative to their proximity to you. The closer and older the relationship, the stronger your expectations are enforced. In some areas we are less likely to behave according to social conforms and acceptances, based on the amount of nurturing and discipline that we experienced growing up, we establish our own stance to society’s rules of conduct and behaviour. Based on how our guardians related to one another and to us, we establish how we will expect others tho relate to us. Therefore if a child experienced abandonment from a parent, they’re more likely to fear abandonment and expect it in relationships when they are older. Simply put, our childhood relationships will be mirrored in our adulthood unless there is a conscious intervention to alter this. If a child has been abused by a family member upon whom they are dependent, the trust in that relationship is broken and therefore the child grows with a defective relationship to authority and personal relationships. This will be the mirror of the cycle of their relationships, which is ultimately a reflection of their relationship with themselves.
These are the patterns we must begin to observe in ourselves. What we may ideally expect from our relations and what we experience may be two different things. How is this? A young child who experienced the wrath of an aggressive father may grow up to experience the same attitude in an authoritative figure, e.g. a boss at work. The way that others relate to us, sometimes instinctively, without knowing us, is very much based on the early experiences which built our self image, the one we project on an instinctive level. This is something that will take a period of self reflective analysis to explore properly.
Once we have had a good look at our own individual circumstances, observed the patterns and noted the cycles, we can gain some level of control over the relationships we choose to have, because the image we project of ourselves will be one of self awareness of a particular set of values. The secret power of self awareness is that it recognises awareness in others. The stronger your powers of observation are in yourself, the more you are able to observe others, the more data you collect in your own habits, behaviours, attitudes, beliefs, insecurities etc, the more data you will be able to observe in others.
Now, beneath the personalities that clothe each of us in our individuality, our naked truths are the same. This is where Gurdjieff was the master of all observers, he knew what it truly meant that humans have a multiplicity of I’s. A man goes to bed promising himself to awaken the next morning fresh and early and go for a morning run. Morning comes and another part of him silences the alarm clock. Between these two I’s in him, there is a disappointing sense of a lack of will and achievement and a third critical I is empowered. One day he promises its his last packet of cigarettes, the next day he makes up for the tension he caused for himself. Humans are multiple beings, they have multiple desires, multiple commitments, a multiplicity of opposing needs, hopes, dreams and promises unkept. One day its “till death do us part” and the next its “see you later”.
How does this relate to the issues of trust? On a natural and instinctive level, it demonstrates that you can only trust one another to be ever changing, to be a multiplicity and to some extent to abide by the social conforms and rules that govern the particular community you happen to inhabit.
More than this the concept of trust that we hold close to our hearts is related to a sense of safety, honour and promise. So we may trust guardians to protect their children, we may trust our friends with respect to the honour we bestow upon them to be in relationship with us, and we may trust those we enter into a promissory or legally recongnised relationship with, such as spouses, contractors, business partners etc. However more often in reality we see that the trust that is natural in these relationships is broken by one or both parties due to a lack of commitment to the values that the relationships were based on.
So what does this mean? Can we not trust others? Can we only trust them to act in a manner of inconsistency and therefore can we no longer hold someone accountable for the promises they make or the value of their responsibilities, for e.g. of a parent to child? To some extent the truth is that we cannot trust anyone to be as we expect them to be, ordinarily human nature does not enjoy the discipline that can merit trust in the absolute sense of its meaning. In reality in most modern societies all our relationships are governed by rules of conduct, religious beliefs, social customs, and laws that instill a sense of responsibility, fear and punishment in response to the question of trust. However, although this may resolve a financial loss, it may resolve a custody case, it may prove as an example, yet it does nothing to answer the real question, nor provide a real solution to the problem of trust.
If you truly wish to trust someone, you must first identify what trust means to you. Where do you stand in your relationship with yourself? Are you certain about who you are? Have you defined yourself? Are you certain about what your values are? Are you certain that in your relationships you project your sense of self worth and your values to your benefit? Or do you act to your detriment? If you are certain about these answers, then you are unchanging where they are concerned, you know who you are and can hold yourself accountable and responsible. If you are not certain about your values then you must leave room for a multiplicity of experiences to manifest in that area. As with all things, if you don’t know what you want, then you’ll get whatever comes.
When you are identifying others, remove your expectations from them, let them manifest their own values, and observe what rules they govern with over themselves. Observe their values and where they are not defined, then you must leave room for multiplicity.
The truth is that we can only trust others to be themselves, to be the manifestations of their beliefs and values, and their multiplicities. Beyond that we must first learn to establish our own values, learn to trust ourselves in manifesting them, and then attract those who share the same values and common goals. To that end we can trust them to act in order to fulfill the shared values and goals.
Our understanding of trust is in constant evolution. Our hopes and ideals are that we may live in a mutually responsible state of consciousness, of mutual respect and love, which ultimately equates to mutual trust. Or does it? Change is the only constant, and in today’s world change is the only norm, change in minds, change in hearts, change in jobs, change in partners, change in parents, change in children, we can trust this to be the norm. Therefore what can we really trust and rely on? What we stand for, our personal and shared values, they never change.

