Hmmm, depends on what sort of activity I have to trust my life to you for. There are circumstances where I don't think you'd have the particular skill set for me to trust my life to you (and I wouldn't), and others where you do(and I would).
I think I'd interpret a generic "trust with my life" as including trusting someone to know their relevant limitations. (Which you may or may not think I do l-)
Needless to say, I don't trust you to operate to remove a putative brain tumour from my putative head.
However, assuming that you actually have the power to save/take my life, then I'd trust you with that. To be honest, I'd trust pretty much everyone in the world with my life, or anyone else's.
That is, assuming they had the necessary skills to keep me alive (e.g. "hold onto this rope") and were fully convinced of the fact that I'll die if they don't do what's asked, I'm pretty sure most people would do their level best to keep me alive. Or any other randomly-picked person. The only time I can see them *not* doing their best is if there's a specific grudge, or they don't actually believe that they're responsible for my life/death (i.e. they assume Jeremy Beadle will pop up with a safety net).
It's one of those paradoxes - the more important something is, the [i]more[/i] you can trust a random person with the responsibility, assuming they actually have the necessary skills. Now, trusting someone with a pound coin, or the second half of a chocolate bar is entirely a different matter.
I note the world of semantic difference between "I would trust ewx with MY reputation??" and "I would trust ewx, with MY reputation??"
I answered everything (largely negatively, I'm afraid) as asking whether I would trust in an unforced environment. In many circumstances, if I had to trust someone, you'd be reasonably high on the list of people to choose.
And a lot would depend on which other person's life, of course…
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 12:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 12:42 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 12:43 pm (UTC)Oh, and if the last answer is true then I think I could trust you on everything else, not to do what I wanted but to at least be predictable.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 12:53 pm (UTC)Oh, and probably. Though it depends, do you have to do something complicated to save my life, or just not screw up something simple? :)
(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 01:16 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 01:29 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 02:05 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 04:42 pm (UTC)However, assuming that you actually have the power to save/take my life, then I'd trust you with that. To be honest, I'd trust pretty much everyone in the world with my life, or anyone else's.
That is, assuming they had the necessary skills to keep me alive (e.g. "hold onto this rope") and were fully convinced of the fact that I'll die if they don't do what's asked, I'm pretty sure most people would do their level best to keep me alive. Or any other randomly-picked person. The only time I can see them *not* doing their best is if there's a specific grudge, or they don't actually believe that they're responsible for my life/death (i.e. they assume Jeremy Beadle will pop up with a safety net).
It's one of those paradoxes - the more important something is, the [i]more[/i] you can trust a random person with the responsibility, assuming they actually have the necessary skills. Now, trusting someone with a pound coin, or the second half of a chocolate bar is entirely a different matter.
(no subject)
Date: 2007-10-18 05:26 pm (UTC)I answered everything (largely negatively, I'm afraid) as asking whether I would trust in an unforced environment. In many circumstances, if I had to trust someone, you'd be reasonably high on the list of people to choose.
And a lot would depend on which other person's life, of course…