Would You Rather: Trust everyone completely or Trust no one at all?
Would you rather Trust everyone completely or Trust no one at all? What other people think of us shapes everything. "Trust everyone completely" or "Trust no one at all" — which judgment could you bear? The first option, "Trust everyone completely", has a certain appeal that is worth unpacking. It promises something — a capability, a freedom, a knowledge — that most people go their whole lives without. But the promise is not free. Every gain in one dimension requires a corresponding sacrifice elsewhere, and the social category tends to make those sacrifices particularly vivid. You would have to live with the consequences every single day. "Trust no one at all" deserves the same scrutiny. At first, it might seem like the safer or more reasonable option. But safety has its own costs. Choosing this path means closing the door on what "Trust everyone completely" offered, and over time, that closed door can become the thing you think about most. In social dilemmas specifically, the option that seems less dramatic often turns out to be more life-altering in practice. The real tension here is not between "Trust everyone completely" and "Trust no one at all" as isolated options. It is between two different visions of who you want to be. Our community has voted on this 9,889 times, and the split — roughly 47% for the first option — shows how divided people are. That division is healthy. It means.