SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

There is a phenomenon happening across the globe that parallels so closely with the experience of infidelity that it sometimes makes me wonder if I was being prepared for this very time. I hope that I will be able to succinctly explain it because it’s one of the rare times where I feel like things are entering consciousness from the outside in versus the inverse (which is how I believe it to traditionally be - we see the world as we are). Nonetheless I think it may have benefit for those that are navigating the question of "Do I have the truth?"

Caveat: It is not my intention for any aspect of this thread to turn to politics. If it does, the meaning and the thread (rightfully so) will be lost.

There is an inclination for things to be presented and held as THE truth. Truth is not being discovered or learned as much as it is being TOLD…like it’s some one dimensional thing and the keepers of it hold all the power.

That’s not necessarily a new thing…and many many of us have experienced this and its subsequent by-products as we have tried to still squeeze it from our WSs no matter how much they try to convince us we know it all.

Truth has….a feeling to it. Its own sense. As does the absence of it. It (eventually) overcomes…no matter how long it may take. Many of us have experienced this in the "I knew it!" moments when it finally surfaces. Some of us have been puzzled by a strange relief we felt after dday…or wishing (WTH!) that our WSs would just "do it again". We are designed to SEARCH for truth…and whether we are ready to acknowledge it or not, most of us just know when we have it. Something in our spirit just becomes satisfied - no matter the horror of it in reality.

But here’s the point: How many of us are willing to just accept that sense - or lack of it? I mean, just accept it….or that we don’t yet have it. Full stop. How many times do we feel we must DISPROVE something that has been presented to us as truth…like somehow it IS truth until we disprove it.

How did we get to this point?? That we feel we must disprove it for it not to be true? Is truth really dependent on that? Does it require that we must defend it in such a way…or can it really stand in its own? And if it can’t stand on its own, can it even BE truth?

Would having this perception, awareness, change how we engage with our WSs "truths"? Would we even need to engage with those aspects? Would it make things easier if we just didn’t? Would it make it more difficult for our WSs to stop recreating "truth"? (Good grief, haven’t most of us experienced that mulberry bush as nauseum??). Are we really searching for truth…or are we really just trying to force our WSs to acknowledge the truth? Like they don’t already know it or something??

What would happen if we were to just stop defending truth? Isn’t it the feeling - that sense - we are actually looking for? Can that not be the waypost rather than mucking around in all the shit details? "Nope…doesn’t feel right" could be enough.

I ask myself what would it take…like, literally, what would it take? And I realized - at least for me - that answer is simply trusting in myself. Not that I have it all, not that I’m simply right, not that I can’t grow beyond what I currently believe and believe something different. But simply, at the moment, this is not true to me. And THAT is MY truth.

What is any truth worth if I don’t believe it? If it doesn’t create that sense? And why in the hell would I try to force myself to?? How could that possibly get me any closer to it if doing so fundamentally requires that I don’t believe myself?

Wondering more and more if this search for truth isn’t really about getting the truth..but more that the truth we have we don’t like.

For me the problem is that trusting oneself is very tricky, since we are so highly defined by our upbringing. That closes one off from facts that conflict with what one has been taught, even though all of us have been taught some falsehoods. The problem is that falsehoods gain force if they're repeated enough times.

Relying on oneself can lead one to accept one's own beliefs as normal and correct without testing one's beliefs. To identify truth, IMO, one has to questions one's motivations, upbringing, and prejudices in light of facts, the opinions of others, the identifiable motivations and prejudices of authorities, and more. One has to identify and validate one's assumptions. One has to question and validate the ideas of the authorities one accepts. When the bulk of a profession agrees on something, they're likely to be correct - 'likely'. not 'certain.'

IMO, objectivity is crucial to making good decisions, but objectivity is an ideal that can't be achieved in the real world. That doesn't mean, however, that we can decide as if there are no facts to help us discern truth. Observation has taught us a lot - for example, that people tend to believe lies if they're repeated often enough, that eating certain plants will have dire consequences, that the best predictor of SAT performance is parents' income, etc.

Facts help determine opinions. As a former politician taught, we're all entitled to our opinions, but we are not entitled to our own facts.

Would having this perception, awareness, change how we engage with our WSs "truths"? Would we even need to engage with those aspects? Would it make things easier if we just didn’t? Would it make it more difficult for our WSs to stop recreating "truth"? (Good grief, haven’t most of us experienced that mulberry bush as nauseum??). Are we really searching for truth…or are we really just trying to force our WSs to acknowledge the truth? Like they don’t already know it or something??

I started out thinking that the truth would give me a necessary understanding of my W's A. In the end, I realized nothing would do that, but giving me honest answers showed that my W was a good candidate for R. Honest answers showed she took responsibility for her actions. Each answer created a tiny bond that grew with each additional honest answer.

So truth from a WS is of critical importance, but in unexpected ways.

I ask myself what would it take…like, literally, what would it take? And I realized - at least for me - that answer is simply trusting in myself. Not that I have it all, not that I’m simply right, not that I can’t grow beyond what I currently believe and believe something different. But simply, at the moment, this is not true to me. And THAT is MY truth.

What is any truth worth if I don’t believe it? If it doesn’t create that sense? And why in the hell would I try to force myself to?? How could that possibly get me any closer to it if doing so fundamentally requires that I don’t believe myself?

Are you suggesting that truth is a work-in-progress? If so, I agree with you. Presumably we learn as we grow, and that learning gets us closer to the truth. Sometimes that results in taking on new beliefs that are 180 degrees from one's starting beliefs; sometimes not.

What is any truth worth if I don’t believe it? If it doesn’t create that sense? And why in the hell would I try to force myself to?? How could that possibly get me any closer to it if doing so fundamentally requires that I don’t believe myself?

That could be a big problem for you and for people you influence, IMO.

Again IMO, it's best to keep in mind that beliefs are subject to change in the light of new info. Also IMO, it's also best to keep in mind that one can always - ALWAYS - be wrong. We know that in many cases nicing a WS back into an M usually has negative consequences. We don't know that it always has negative consequences.

We know rug-sweeping a problem usually lets a problem grow bigger. We also know that some problems disappear on their own. We don't really know how to distinguish the problems that need action from those that don't. We can make some informed guesses, but we don't have knowledge.

*****

I'm an IT/historian-type of human being. If I were a philosopher, I might say you've identified an epistemological problem - how we know what (we think) we know. There are, no doubt, books on epistemology, but I don't know any to recommend.

[This message edited by SI Staff at 7:55 PM, Saturday, December 2nd]

Such a good conversation. I agree with the original post that truth has a feeling to it. In my WW's position, things make sense and I can just see it in her eyes, or they don't and I can't. Sometimes I wish she would just admit that she's not going to tell me the truth, and at least be honest about that.

There is an inclination for things to be presented and held as THE truth. Truth is not being discovered or learned as much as it is being TOLD…like it’s some one dimensional thing and the keepers of it hold all the power.

I can relate to this 100%. As an exercise my wife had recently discussed with her IC, she handed me a written page as a "stipulation of facts" that she hoped we could agree on. I rejected about 50% because it wasn't "accepted" as truth, but was simply her most recent version of it. Her mindset is that I should accept things simply because she says so, especially since she's admitted her past lies. That's just not going to happen.

That could be a big problem for you and for people you influence, IMO.

Again IMO, it's best to keep in mind that beliefs are subject to change in the light of new info. Also IMO, it's also best to keep in mind that one can always - ALWAYS - be wrong.

Oh, sisson… my beloved sandpaper, I appreciate you so much! ❤️. I think we are largely on the same page throughout the post but this has me questioning if we might have diverged here…not necessarily in beliefs but in communication. To speak directly for myself, I try really hard not to ever assume I am RIGHT (which is so much easier than later admitting I was wrong. 😉). It’s kind of a matter of when you really start to grasp just how much you don’t know - despite how long you have believed a thing or the source from which you received it or how many people are in agreement - then it’s hard to ever believe you are actually "right" (whatever that even means) about anything. It doesn’t necessarily mean we should have no beliefs…we just realize they are exactly that, beliefs. Do you believe in gravity (and it’s explanations)…or do you simply belief that let go of your coffee cup (or beer mug) and it’s going to move in one direction? Because really only one of those I would call a fact. Which doesn’t mean that I DON’T believe in gravity - and not just in this particular example. I use it simply to make the point. One thing happens…but how it is explained may simultaneously NOT be the truth…and I can accept what does feel right for me without accepting how it is interpreted or explained at large. I can simply just not know that part. You make that point by recognizing how much we may not really own many of our beliefs as our own - of which I agree completely - if simply because we have not yet had experiences to call them into question. Challenge a Western religious zealot (bc that’s all I have had experience with, may or may not be the same on a larger scale) if aliens can be real and watch how vehement many will become. It’s not because aliens are or aren’t real (I don’t know…have no personal experiences). It’s not because if they are real then they are malevolent and will wipe out our world (don’t know that either). It’s because the question threatens their entire spiritual belief base - which may or may not be true either. Seems ironic but my experience is that the world has grown much more magical when I am willing to acknowledge and embrace the mystery.

All that said and to bring it back to my main "rebuttal" (really, just further clarification) and to the heart of what I am pondering…maybe it’s less about truth as an accepted or agreed upon narrative and more about how the answers sit within my spirit. Maybe in our search for "the truth", we have missed the primordial, even spiritual, guidepost (that sense I am talking about). I do find it interesting that the frequent early advice in dealing with infidelity is "trust your gut". And through that experience we are a community that’s ripe to be exploring these kinds of questions. ❤️

[This message edited by truthsetmefree at 10:08 PM, Saturday, December 2nd]

I think I see the distinction you're making between believing in gravity vs believing a cup will drop towards the center of the earth if you purposely drop it.

To me the distinction is how we decide to believe authorities vs how much we rely on ourselves. I believe the theory of gravity. As I remember what I learned, the theory explains the things the theorists say it does, and so far, nothing has refuted the theory. I can't do the experiments to validate the theory, and even if I could, I don't have time to reinvent every wheel. I believe (!) that nobody has that much time. So we have to pick and choose what we believe.

But there are 'things' like infidelity. My infidelity experience is nothing like I thought it would be, excep that we R'ed. I expected that, because when we discussed infidelity 50 odd years ago, we agreed that we could R after an A if both of us wanted to, and both of us did want to stay together back in 2010-2011-2012, by which time we knew R was working for us. But I had no idea how painful being betrayed was. So infidelity, for me, NEEDED first hand experience.

I don't always know how to distinguish things that need first hand experience from those that don't for myself. I do have some ideas about general principles.

*****

When you talk about feeling the truth, I think of 'using intuition' and 'reasoning by induction and/or analogy'. Is that what you mean?

If so, I'd expect new knowledge to feel wrong if it conflicts with one's beliefs. At one time, MDs didn't wash their hands between patients. One result was spreading 'childbed fever' throughout whole maternity wards. It took a fight within the medical profession to take measures to wash their hands between patients. Part of the fight was probably due to the fact that the theory in Vienna was invented(?) by someone who came from a minority in the population (a Hungarian among German speakers, even though his father migrated from Germany to Hungary). (Other scientists came to similar conclusions - Lister in Scotland, Pasteur in France, for example.)

But I'd bet a lot that these newly discovered truths felt very uncomfortable at first, so I'm skeptical that intuition is correct enough of the time to rely on ... and yet ... it's a pretty good indicator in relationships. Intuition's message isn't always clear in relationships, but if one's gut is uncomfortable, it's reliable enough to require some sort of action.

Also, in the absence of convincing facts or WRT questions on which there's great controversy, I guess one has to withhold judgment or go with what one's intuition says is right. I lean to and recommend withholding judgment ... but that's probably my personality and prejudices at work. Hmmm ... I wonder what the world would be like if everyone took on my prejudices....

Ah, truth - your posts that aim to provoke thinking (as opposed to your sharing posts to which I wouldn't dream of responding with anything but sharing something, too) always open up opportunities to learn. I really appreciate that.

To me the distinction is how we decide to believe authorities vs how much we rely on ourselves.

Yes, I tend to think this is a large contributing factor as well. It’s also part of what I see happening on a larger scale. It’s not so much a matter of whether those authorities (whoever they may be) are right or wrong - or even good or bad. It’s that we have been trained - yes, I do lean toward that belief - to not question. It seems we are now at a place where it is even more obvious (and subsequently threatening) that one can be socially tossed from the "pack" for not holding agreed upon beliefs (or even just authoritarian beliefs). I wonder if this is actually inciting division as people strive to find new tribes - that frequently then take very defensive and sometimes even aggressive stances, particularly since protecting their beliefs seems to feel necessary.

As for beliefs being based on personal experiences - shouldn’t they all be?

Now as to how attainable that is - yeah, there’s probably a lot of stuff that we will never have the time or opportunity. And perhaps that’s the point. When I start asking myself why do I believe what I believe and really drill it down, most of the time it’s entirely outside of myself - both on basis and experience. In essence, many times I can hardly even trace back to how it became a belief because I was never really an active participant - just a conditioned subject. How can I look at videos or pictures and believe we have been to the moon - but also watch space movies and believe that is not real? What exactly drew that line? (Which matters way more - in my mind - than if we have ever really been to the moon.). But a spaceship of aliens lands in my back yard and I see little green men? Yeah…F anybody that later tries to tell me they aren’t real - I don’t care their beliefs, experiences, or credentials. The only thing I must now manage is the ostracization.

When you talk about feeling the truth, I think of 'using intuition' and 'reasoning by induction and/or analogy'. Is that what you mean?

If so, I'd expect new knowledge to feel wrong if it conflicts with one's beliefs.

To bring it back toward the main point - yes, maybe…if this is just semantics. But it also could be key. When you describe 'using intuition' and 'reasoning by induction and/or analogy' - that still suggests thought (the thinking aspect) to me. Which can be an enhancement (serving to reinforce) to that feeling part - or it can be a deterrent or even an avoidance escape. An example would be that when I started getting that uncomfortable feeling that maybe my WS was cheating, I instead turned to "Oh, he would never do that!"….and then began to kick over rocks for supporting thoughts. When could he? Where would he have done it - I see all the money! . And around and around it went bc these two aspects would not reconcile enough to even be in the same room. So did reason/thinking serve or deter? And what is it prone to do if most humans are uncomfortable with having any of their existing beliefs challenged? While infidelity tends to insist on tying those two things’ tails together and letting them fight it out over the clothesline, how does this work with most other more benign things? Hard to just make the other "the enemy" when it’s sleeping in your bed. But if it’s not? The cycle is reinforced and we reach a point where - despite thinking strongly otherwise - we really don’t even know what is truly right or wrong…or maybe even why we are so committed to our side.

It’s so interesting to me that trust becomes such a huge issue after infidelity - even in new relationships that haven’t had the experience. We chalk that up to the loss of innocence, naivety…like people are bad, they do bad things, they can’t be trusted. Monsters under the bed. We know they’re out there…we just don’t yet know if he/she is one of them. We may now even pride ourselves on no longer having "blind trust". What is trust anyway? Where is the line that delineates someone as being UNtrustworthy? Is trust not just a theory waiting to be disproven because it can never really be proven? Maybe it’s just the absence of that feeling I’m talking about (and we call that trust) - because I think we tend to give less attention to the truth feeling and more to the untruth feeling (which would make sense because recognizing the untruth feeling likely also challenges a held belief).

Rambling now - - but to bring it back to maybe something less theoretical (though still some rhetorical) and perhaps more useful…does truth/untruth have a feeling to it, something deep within your spirit? As WhiteCarrera described in his post…that loud nuance, read in so many ways in the moment (by the thinking brain) but indescribable felt in the soul. And is it enough to simple be…well, enough. Not the idea of truth…but the feeling.

I can’t help but be drawn back to biblical scripture that seemed at the time - I don’t know - like maybe a cop out? (Ugh, that thought felt icky then, still feels icky now). Where God self describes as, I Am.

And I feel like I am finally starting to understand. When it’s real, it stands on its own - without explanation and needing no defense.

[This message edited by truthsetmefree at 10:02 PM, Sunday, December 3rd]

Sometimes I wish she would just admit that she's not going to tell me the truth, and at least be honest about that.

And this is such an interesting perspective from WhiteCarrera’s post that may serve to more succinctly make my point. Basically, does knowing/accepting that we don’t have the truth make dealing with that so much easier because we’re not having to wrestle with paper tigers? Is that something we can give to ourselves - even if only because we don’t FEEL like we have truth?

i think looking at the definition and entymology of the word might help.

This is from Meriam Webster -- we can look other places too as Meriam Webster certainly does not have a corner on it.

1a (1): the body of real things, events, and facts : ACTUALITY
(2) the state of being the case : FACT
(3) often capitalized : a transcendent fundamental or spiritual reality
b : a judgment, proposition, or idea that is true or accepted as true : truths of thermodynamics
c: the body of true statements and propositions
2a : the property (as of a statement) of being in accord with fact or reality
b chiefly British : TRUE sense 2
c : fidelity to an original or to a standard
3a : sincerity in action, character, and utterance
b archaic : FIDELITY, CONSTANCY
4 capitalized Christian Science : GOD

Now for the etemology

Middle English trewthe, from Old English trēowth fidelity; akin to Old English trēowe faithful — more at TRUE entry 1

The only truth about marriages impacted by infidelity is there is no trēowth.

😂😂❤️

Well played, Jason. And if you intended also the irony, it was not lost on me. 😉

I work as a scientist/engineer, and one of the most enjoyable parts of my job is when a mystery resolves and everything makes sense. I think that is a form of that feel of truth you describe, like when a crossword puzzle is all coming together.

One of the wonderful things about the universe is that it never lies to you. It speaks in riddles and is indifferent to our beliefs, but it never lies. So in that case, the sense of satisfaction that comes with self consistency can be well correlated with truth.

Unfortunately, the same can’t be said about people. It cannot be assumed that another sentient being will be unwaveringly truthful with us, especially one with ulterior motives, such as a WS. Now the sense of self consistency (which I think is the closest we can come to sensing truth) has all kinds of mixed up factors that come with it. Levels of trust, ability to verify, body language. The pure pleasure of asking the perfectly honest universe is gone, replaced with possible gaslighting, but we still have the same tools to judge both.

The problem with the world in general at the moment is that people simply don't believe objective truth even exists, hence why the phrase "my truth" become part of common parlance. If no one can even agree to set of facts, then finding common ground on opinions is impossible.

This conversation, to me, can be very much a loop. The examination of an elephant by three blind people is a prime example of what is the truth. One at the tail, one at the belly, one at the trunk describing what the elephant looks like. No one is lying, but you don’t get the whole truth. The problem with trying to get the truth from anyone is how dedicated they are to actually saying it. If you are in a protective mode and are scared to death to open up, you will learn to lie very effectively. The one thread that runs through this forum, and every forum on the Internet, is that if you come from a toxic, chaotic childhood, the truth is so distorted that you might never get to it. You may have learned in early childhood that telling the truth gets you in so much trouble it is easier to lie. That just becomes part of how you process the world. To be married to someone who considers, cheating, lying, theft, fraud as just ways of life is not going to ever get you the truth. You can get on the Internet and find someone who espouse the thing you believe and do so so effectively that they reinforce what you think. There must be as many people on the other side of that as you have, and they believe their side just as powerfully. My simple solution to a good bit of this is simply to give someone a happy, safe childhood, and how many people on the planet earth actually have that.