Jamal Awil

← Trust and Trustworthiness

Trust can excuse inaction yet ultimately prove culpable stupidity [causal]

Linger with this issue for a moment. In The Remains of the Day, Kazuo Ishiguro portrays Mr. Stevens, an aging butler rethinking his life with his late master. In an imagined debate with another servant, Stevens says, "the likes of you and I will never be in a position to comprehend the great affairs of today's world, and our best course will always be to put our trust in an employer we judge to be wise and honourable, and to devote our energies to the task of serving him to the best of our ability" (Ishiguro 1990, 201). He slowly revalues his master from the point of view of others, who detested the master's reprehensible and foolish politics. "At least [his lordship] had the privilege of being able to say at the end of his life that he made his own mistakes," Stevens reflects. "I cannot even claim that. You see, I trusted. I trusted in his lordship's wisdom. All those years I served him, I trusted I was doing something worthwhile. I can't even say I made my own mistakes. Really—one has to ask oneself—what dignity is there in that?" (Ishiguro 1990, 243). Stevens recognizes that trust can finally be stupid and, when it seemingly justifies action or inaction, even culpable.

XREF: Connects to political philosophy on delegation of judgment to authority figures — Milgram's obedience experiments and debates on the Banality of Evil (Arendt).

Russell Hardin, Trust and Trustworthiness, loc. 175