Yesterday I tried to begin a discussion about what happens when institutions behave in ways that erode the public’s trust.

There are many ways this erosion can happen, financial corruption, nepotism and other kinds of favouritism, and general ineffectiveness are major contributors, but nothing is as immediate as when the public finds the institution lying. True, the public seems to give large margins for dissembling, obfuscation, and stonewalling, but the clarity of outright lying makes trust difficult to maintain.

Of course some maintain their trust no matter what lies the authorities entrusted to steward an institution propagate and get caught in. We see this with the Mormons we left behind. No matter how many reversals in doctrine they witness, no matter how many times their leaders say one thing and then the reverse thing, their trust doesn’t waver. They are true-blue, which presumably means believers to the end, no matter what.

And of course we also see this in politics and the media. No matter how many lies a politician or media person/outlet get caught in, there will be some people who will remain true blue, believers to the end. This kind of person’s trust seems bottomless, impervious to being undermined.

Then there’s the rest of us. We witness a lie, like Hinckley’s “I don’t know that we teach that” on 60 Minutes, or like the WMD lie propagated everywhere to serve as an excuse to invade another country, and we immediately begin to put our trust in question. Two lies and we’re out, fool me once, fool me twice, etc.


Trust in institutions is always crucial, and possibly never more so than in the near future.

It’s possible if not likely that a coronavirus vaccine will be mandated by law. The pertinent question was posed at 3QuarksDaily this morning, are we obligated to be vaccinated, and if so, is that obligation large enough to justify a law compelling vaccination in an entire population? The essay leaves aside the legal aspect and focuses on the moral and ethical aspects of the question.

The short answer in the essay is yes, one is obligated, provided three presuppositions are met, 1) that the vaccine is safe, 2) that the vaccine is effective, and 3) that the virus is sufficiently dangerous enough to warrant the obligation. Also, since vaccines *do* harm some individuals, but at a rate that is considered acceptable, a further comment was made to the essay pointing out that if a vaccine became mandatory by law, then those who are injured ought to be properly compensated.

So, to circle back to the question of trust and institutions: we notice that our knowing anything about the stipulated three presuppositions depends entire upon what institutional authority tells us. Hence the obvious necessity for public trust in institutions, and the obvious necessity for institutions to zealously guard against losing that trust.


RfMers have varying degrees of trust in institutional authority, from none to blindly. It’s an important recovery topic because we share a common experience with an erosion of trust, in an institution and in the authority figures and stewards of that institution. Trust/mistrust, and where to place it and not place it, and why, is central to our recovery from Mormonism and so much else besides.

Human

( Hat tip to Henry Bemis for raising an important recovery question.)

The Essay:

https://www.3quarksdaily.com/3quarksdaily/2020/06/are-we-obligated-to-be-vaccinated.html#more-180023

Thanks for this important thread!

Human: "So, to circle back to the question of trust and institutions: we notice that our knowing anything about the stipulated three presuppositions depends entire upon what institutional authority tells us. Hence the obvious necessity for public trust in institutions, and the obvious necessity for institutions to zealously guard against losing that trust."

COMMENT: In this case, the institutional trust (and authority) will likely be centered (at least rhetorically) on the scientific community. Most progressives treat this community with a level of unquestioned trust that is not always well-defined and deserved; particularly when such institutions are themselves highly influenced by political, social, and financial factors. Such factors dilute their scientific credibility significantly; at least in my view. (Pharmaceutical oriented "science" specifically comes to mind.) Moreover, as noted in the other thread, the modern traditional progressive, humanistic, and feminist, stance with respect to science was largely distrust, not trust. And this was not without some justification.

Notwithstanding the above, society has to look somewhere to find a rational basis for social policy. If not science; then where? Certainly NOT religion! Moreover, the more drastic the potential social consequences are with respect to an issue, the more trust in science is perhaps warranted (or should be assumed). Thus, in the face of an environmental crisis; or a dangerous pandemic, arguably we would be best served by giving the scientific consensus the benefit of the doubt, notwithstanding our distrust.

But there is another--potentially more serious--problem that you raise. How do we know what the scientific consensus (authority) really is; particularly in close calls? And what identifiable subset of the scientific community gets to be counted when considering such "consensus?" The more elusive and controversial such "consensus" is, the more politically saturated it becomes.

Finally, we all rely on some media outlet(s) for our information. To insist that any such outlets (whoever they are) are "objective" and thus trustworthy--even in in the face of a pandemic--is naïve. Every social crisis involves a complex of worldviews, such that any proposed solutions will spill over into politics to some extent. We can only do the best we can to sort it all out.

I trust the common citizen over all authority at this point. There is clearly a disconnect between the people and the authorities just like there was in religion. The new low level cult leaders are beating people with batons right now or showering people with mace like its sunscreen or choking them for no reason.

People need to trust their own abilities to make good judgments, They need to study out a problem and decide if it's worth it. There's no reason to blindly trust intellectuals and so called scientists because most of these folks have their own agendas (or are funded by bureaucrats). Big heads like Bill Gates and George Sorros have a lot of power and money in these matters, lots of money. I don't trust them, especially since they don't know half of what they are talking about most of the time.

America was founded to be a place where there was suppose to be an informed citizenry, Every child was suppose to get a elementary education so they could make contracts and read the bible. They were suppose to learn why America is exceptional and why freedom is important, and being a good citizen. Saddly teachers have failed american students by the reality of 400 years of poverty and problems and lack of morals.

As for the government forcing people to vaccinate, lets hope that doesn't happen, but that folks will willingly agree to the procedure (if it's a good vaccine) instead.

>>Saddly teachers have failed american students by the reality of 400 years of poverty and problems and lack of morals.

Why is it that the people who say things like this never become teachers? You would have so much ability to influence youth to your pleasing. All it takes is a Bachelor's degree (to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars,) an eventual Master's degree (more tens of thousands of dollars,) additional college credits and training (is your wallet out yet?) a number of lengthy exams to pass (I hope that test-taking is one of your talents, and oh yeah, more $$$) and the completion of a long student teaching and mentorship process (did I mention that you pay thousands of dollars for this?)

It's almost like the people who are truly interested in influencing American youth think all of this is too hard. Or perhaps they don't find the financial compensation to be adequate enough for that degree of exertion. Go figure?

So Maca, until people like you gain the credentials to teach, I will stand up in front of my students and teach them about environmentalism, and global warming, and equal opportunity, and any number of other similar topics -- *because I can.* lol



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2020 06:58PM by summer.

Right on, summer!

macaRomney Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't trust them, especially since they
> don't know half of what they are talking about
> most of the time.

Says the man who doesn't know the difference between the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.


------------------
> America was founded to be a place where there was
> suppose to be an informed citizenry,

Says the man who thinks ninth grade math is a waste.


-----------------
> Every child [was] suppose to learn why America is exceptional
> and why freedom is important, and being a good
> citizen.

Provide a single governmental document that states that the goal is to teach "why America is exceptional." Because you pulled that out of your nether regions.


--------------
> Saddly teachers have failed american
> students by the reality of 400 years of poverty
> and problems and lack of morals.

That sentence makes no sense. You are hardly an example of what thinking Americans should be.


--------------
> As for the government forcing people to vaccinate,
> lets hope that doesn't happen, but that folks will
> willingly agree to the procedure (if it's a good
> vaccine) instead.

That would require good sense and civic spiritedness, and your post indicates that both are in short supply.







ETA: The truth is, macaRomney, that you are still a highly religious man. You may have left Mormonism but you still reject science and insist on your own religious mythology. Your "recovery" hasn't even begun.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 06/22/2020 07:18PM by Lot's Wife.

MacaRomney there is nothing wrong with having an opinion like yours.

You left one cult. Why join another?

Sometimes we love to other give other people all the power over our lives so we don't have to take responsibility for it - ie make hard decisions.

Whether it is spiritual or civil matters, history has taught us those who relinquish this power it ends up biting them in the butt. Hence this forum.

All opinions are equal.

Damn the facts, full speed ahead!

Isn’t that the American Dream?

I don’t know if our institutions can fix this. Trust in many of them, from POTUS and Congress to the medical profession to the police, has been wrecked in 2020 and the year is only half over. Look at how many people won’t wear a simple mask. You won’t be able to make them take a vaccine even at gunpoint after they’ve seen such an unprecedented display of institutional incompetence. This confidence loss is the driver for BLM. It turned the issue of bad police culture into an existential crisis. What’s going to happen when white people are afraid of dying of a virus contracted from other white people? I’m afraid it’s going to get surreal.

Exactly.

The word fact only has meaning for a small percentage of Americans nowadays who know what the word actually represents while the majority seem to think what they want to be true actually is, and, "that's a fact!"

"anybody" posted something about that a few years ago. The thread title was roughly, I can't believe I lived to see a post-reality world."

She was right. We live in a era in which people choose to believe various "religions" despite facts, as if reality is a choice and facts don't matter. They believe in hidden facts, hidden truths, which is the definition of "occult" learning and augers ill for the future.

I believe the current approved designation is "alternative facts", a concept popularized by Baghdad Bob, but polished to a blinding sheen, and christened by Kellyanne. It has gone by various other monikers. "Truthiness" was my fave.