Personal trust

Once, while I was in High School, I attended an overnight camp-out with our church youth group.  Specifically, we spent the night in a lodge at a nearby camp, with a lake, a beach, and trails through the surrounding woods.  I was only minimally active in the church youth group, and only casually acquainted with the other members.  One of the evening's activities involved separating into pairs, and then taking turns being blindfolded while your partner led you around the camp.  Later, we gathered to discuss the experience.  Most of the people described being fearful and apprehensive during the time that they were blindfolded.  I was the only one to express a sense of relaxation and peace.  The period of time that I was blindfolded was the ONLY time during the evening that I had no worries at all about bumping into things or tripping, and had no decisions to make about where to go or what to do.  My partner was carrying all those concerns for me.  While my PARTNER was blindfolded, now THAT was a different story.  THEN, I had to worry constantly about all the misfortunes that might befall my partner if I was careless or inattentive.

As children, my friends and I would often shout out urgent commands to each other, such as "Duck!" or "Look out!" or even "Hide!".  Sometimes the commands might be more specific, like "Kick your right foot!" or "Pedal your bicycle faster!"  In the swimming pool, someone might tell you, "Go underwater!"  I cannot recall a single instance in which there was not a very real reason, or at least a perceived reason, for such a command.  They were NEVER pranks.  Obviously, if you were told to "Duck!" you were in danger of being hit in the head with something.  If you were advised to submerge in the swimming pool, there was probably some sort of stinging/biting insect, either already ON you, or about to land on you.  In every case, failure to heed the command carried some sort of imminent risk, and the response "Why?" was always innappropriate and risky.

I do not know whether my childhood experience might have been unique.  I doubt it.  I do not know whether children growing up in my neighborhood today share the same sort of interactions.  I DO know that if I shout "Duck!" today, at even my closest friends and family members, it is highly unlikely that any of them will respond, other than to ask, "Why?"  Examined objectively and logically, this is absurd.  IF someone you trust feels the need to shout "Duck!" at you, then clearly there is no time for you to ask, "Why?" and for the person to respond, "Because there is a baseball/brick/satellite about to hit you on the back of the head!"

So far, everything I have stated is just undebateable observed phenomena.  I have yet to state any opinion.  My OPINION is that the change is unfortunate; that we would all be better off if grownups could still yell, "Duck!" and have people "duck" without first asking "Why?"

Assuming that I am correct in my observations, and that we are unlikely to immediately "duck" when a trusted friend or family members tells us to, the question is, appropriately, WHY?  This brings up an entire range of other questions.  Is the change simply part of the growth process -- the change from childhood to adulthood?  Or has there been a fundamental change in our society?  Perhaps people are simply less trusting today.  Perhaps we, and especially our children, are simply less active.  In my childhood, most of our activities involved actually moving around.  We had no video games or even videos, and most activities that involved sitting in one spot for more than a few minutes were considered boring.  Today, children are less likely to be in a situation in which they are about to be hit by a baseball, or stung by a bee.  Hit by a video baseball or stung by a video bee really does not carry the same urgency as something that will truly raise a welt.

Perhaps it all relates to issues of independence and control, and our reluctance to subjugate our own wills to that of anyone else.  In my childhood, we were more likely to do things simply because we were told to do them.  We did not ask for reasons -- perhaps AFTER we did what we were told, but certainly not before.

Or perhaps the change comes from the other direction.  Perhaps those who GIVE the urgent commands are less sincere, and more likely to be pulling some sort of prank on us, or making a joke, and we are wisely adapting to this new reality.  If so, this is very sad, and raises a "chicken or egg" question.  If there is a significant chance that, by ducking, we place ourselves at more risk than by not ducking, then it is only logical NOT to duck -- but it is also quite tragic, and means that we are all collectively contributing to this lack of trust -- similar to the idea that by insisting that doors be locked, we are condoning theft of items from unlocked vehicles and homes.

As I continue my speculation, I fear that there are larger issues involved.  IF we lack even this modicum of trust in our most trusted associates -- if we must always ask "Why?" even of them, then what hope is there for situations that require cooperation with those for whom we hold less trust, or even fear.  We do not trust politicians from "the other side" and we do not even trust the politicians that we ourselves vote for.  We know that our politicians must work together to accomplish anything, yet we endorse the fact that politicians from opposing sides refuse to trust each other.

By advocating and embracing the idea that we must maintain our own personal control and independence, and offer unquestioning trust to no one, we isolate ourselves and weaken our society.  You will NEVER have all the information or skills to be totally self-sufficient.  To a certain extent, you will always be stumbling along in the dark, with unseen others offering assistance.  We will all be better off if you can find it in yourself to take that assistance, at least occasionally.