To trust and doubt is not the same as to trust or doubt It is not optional to move from the doubt to the trust because both positions complement each other for which one must dare to challenge?

Answer 1

This is such a philosophical question!

It is true that although opposites, "trust" and "doubt" complement each other. From doubt, we learn what and who to trust. From trust, we learn what and who to doubt.

To trust yet to also doubt is a third category compared to "to trust" or "to doubt". In fact, there are few situations in which we completely "trust" or in which we completely "doubt". Instead, we are usually riding a continuim between trust and doubt during most interactions and experiences.

From experience, both positive and negative, we learn to challege what we doubt, as well as challenge what we trust. However, humans find it harder to challenge things they've already decided are trustworthy, unless some betrayal of that trust occurs. For example, we come to trust a certain brand of product tastes good. We might strongly disagree with someone who says that brand tastes bad, and we might place the negative comments under some qualifying info, like, "people's taste buds are different". But then, one time we experience that the product we trust does indeed taste horrible! Rationally, you know the problem may have been in that one isolated package. Yet, when you reach for it the next time in the store, you withdraw your hand, remembering how horrible it was last time. You have lost your trust in that brand.

Some people would say we must challenge our doubts and learn to trust. But every day, we choose and decide based in part on doubts. "Will Cake Mix A taste better than Cake Mix B?" "Will the girl I like also like me?" "Does the teacher like me?" Doubts shape how we behave, whether well or poorly. Doubts we know; we can list them easily to justify how we think, talk, act, plan, etc. What we trust, though, we unconsciously realize can change in one moment, through one betrayal.

So if our doubts are more conscious, as things we can list quite vocally, wouldn't it be more important to "dare to challenge" what we trust and consciously know why we give it our trust? Why do you trust one friend over another one? Why do you trust one teacher more than another teacher? Why do you trust one restuarant more than one closer to your house? Why do you trust your brand of shampoo? The water you drink? The food you eat?

Note that trust is not "like versus dislike". Trust involves much more than "like". Trust implies a committment between "me" and "the other person" or me and a brand or between me and something I value. Trust implies, to varying degrees, that "I know you (whether "you" is a friend or is a product). Trust implies, in some way, that I have given what I trust some power over me, whether the power is to influence or to love or to buy. If I trust Brand A of Frozen peas, in my trust I give the brand power so that I buy it over and over again. If the trust I give involves influence, like with a teacher, I have subconsciously said "yes" to learning from that teacher through influence and instruction. If it involves love, I have given trust to another person to love me back and to not deliberately hurt me.

But often what we trust is unknown and why we trust is unknown---even if we think we know why we trust. So since I can rattle off all the reasons "I doubt" something or someone, I would dare myself to challenge what "I trust", simply to really know why I have given my trust to a particular person or thing.

Answer 2

Trusting and doubting are not mutually exclusive but rather part of a continuum. It's essential to navigate between the two, as they provide balance and perspective. Embracing the challenge of moving from doubt to trust can lead to growth and deeper understanding.