Expand?

"Well it doesn't work if we hit the ball in the same direction."

Well, it works just fine with this wall in front of both of us.

And that's a fact.

Now I must wander off to do some work, somewhere.

And that's relative, if you ask my colleagues.


With prayers,

The very terms "True" and "False" imply that you are applying a test to a set of conditions that we perceive as fact.

Tests necessarily require establishing criteria...sometimes the criteria is in dispute, sometimes it's not.

Sometimes we accept something as a universal truth simply because we, or a large majority, all agree on the nature of the test and criteria.

And so it was with the law of conservation of mass before nuclear physics...

I believe certain concepts can be universal...like "more" or "less". The world of mathematics has many examples like this and is often referred to as universal language.

Of course that brings up how we define a "fact" doesn't it?

That's what I was thinking.

Again, we can look at math and science, which involve themselves with the pursuit of truth...conveniently dividing truth in hypothesis, theorem, and law...

Yet all these represent is a measure of how universally accepted the particular property and measurement of that property are.

For example...people without any knowledge of quantum mechanics...may think certain laws of physics are absolute simply because their properties can be verified repeatedly and "universally".

BTW, I agree with Aph...ethics and morality may have SOME relationship to truth, but not necessarily.

But to return to the original question...

We are often faced with the classic two choice dilemma.

As I've posted before, each poster has to evaluate for themselves the "lesser of two evils"

In the case of an ongoing affair with continued contact, the choice is between allowing the A to continue and wreak further destruction OR risking enmity and other consequences by exposing. I think a good case can be made that the OWH should be told, becasue I believe that damaged caused by this action becomes moot when the affair continues to be the most dangerous activity here.

However, in the event of a long dead affair with NO chance of further contact, exposure could risk further damage and create the potential for resumed contact. So the spouse has to weight the risks and make a choice.

In advising these posters, all we can really do is theorize how we might respond in the same sitch and offer that up...it will ultimately be their choice...and they will have to live with that.

Hmmm..

If "Truth" is ever elusive and unknowable..is it not also irrelevent?

Of course not...by identfying common tests and criteria we are able to lift the collective we out of chaos and anarchy. By the same reverse process...we can put ourselves back there too.

It's not about whether truth is truly absolute...but how widely accepted a particular truth might be.

Think of it like intellectual capital...when humanity can't agree on how it will measure mass or value human life, it remains fractured...

Yet, when we choose to agree on the "currency" and other common concepts, we begin to have collective power to shape our world to that commonly accepted truth.

The term "absolute truth" is mearly a terminus on a scale for a particular population...

If there are only ten of us in the universe, and we all agree that something is green...then isn't that "absolute truth"?

I think the real issue for me is what MAKES truth be true.

Collective agreement makes for social lubrication and good construction..ie a functional [read productive] society..but it isn't using TRUTH as it's root element.

What is True and how do you know?

What makes it TRUTH as opposed to Fact?

Man, did I just walk in on a stoned dorm room?

Even in pure mathematics, wholly divorced from any known practical application, truth must be defined in advance. It is called an axiom(s).

And it has been proven that no, none, nada, set of axioms is completely self-consistent.

In electric circuit and power grid design there is a thing called a floating ground. Circuit and everything in it works just fine, but don’t be in the way if you touch that circuit to earth.

Do you think it’s obvious that a line divides a plane into two parts? That a point not on the line must be on one side or the other?

This was one of the most difficult things in the history of mathematics to prove. It took centuries. It’s not an obvious truth at all when one tries to actually prove it as a fact and then use it to prove other constructs as facts.

In some sense I can’t quote put my finger on all definitions of anything are relative.

And in some sense, perhaps uncertainty principle wise, all physical attributes are illusionary. It’s much worse than beauty being skin deep. We perceive physical realities, i.e. facts because we fit in to the universe to perceive them.

Now I really do have to make my exit. I hear the floor resident coming.

For those members of the collective, they are CREATING their truth and then using it as their root element...while non-members apply different criteria...resulting in a "false".



You ever watch "The Waterboy"? How did Bobby know why the alligator was so ornery? Cuz...Momma told him so.

The things we know to be true we find out the same way...by sharing ideas, observing our world and drawing conclusions. We just convince ourselve that we're a bit more sophisticated than Bobby...



I suppose that's the $64k question. I "believe" there are real element in this universe that exist and behave without giving a damn about whether we are watching them or not...

But some might disagree with that....

So, I hypothesize that "fact" would be the theoretical ability to perceive these real things in a real and absolute way...

But of course we can't...we are always observing through some medium...

We get closer when we can vary the medium and obtain a "second opinion"...but only closer.

Therefore "facts" become elusive and unknowable...and may be quite irrelevant...

Otherwise, what we commonly refer to as facts are simply those things that we all perceive similarly with near universal or universal agreement.

Excellent point...in fact, the concept of "zero" and "null" are fairly recent adoptions...once considered heretical by the Church!

Not obvious at all to a people who can only perceive their universe in two dimensions... <img src="/ubbt/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

Can someone, anyone please tell me WHY exposing to OM/W's W/H is dangerous to your OWN recovery? I see this trotted out all the time like it is a fact.

I know exposing can result in contact - but how dangerous is that really? Compared to say having another ally in keeping an affair dead and giving the OP's marriage a chance to recover.

Why do people like Star say that it is sooooooooo damaging??

Sure AP may make contact again to blast their former lover but SO WHAT!!!!! What long term damage can that do?

Rather than interesting theories about this, I would like someone who has experienced these mythical harmful effects to tell us their story.

And then I can tell you about how effective exposure was in my wife's affair.

Big K,

Basically..NC breach covers it for me.

If [and this is a big if when the other BS is unaware] a marriage had "recovered" and successfull NC was in place...making contact with the other BS will reintroduce the OP into the existing marriage...heighten need for vigilance..possibly stir up dormant affair feelings..new drama...FWS watching OP suffer and old loyalties resurface...etc.

Lifelong NC is important for a reason...choosing to expose the affair partners to each other [especially in an emotion charged high drama scenario] is always a risk imo.

There would have to be a GOOD reason for me to do it...and even then I wouldn't be skipping to the phone.

Noodle - are you saying that you wouldn't expose to OP's Spouse after 2 years? I'm sure you are not but just checking......

Big K,

I would expose to OPS if I had to walk across the surface of the sun in order to accomplish it...but that doesn't mean that I diminish or deny the potential for it to blow up in my face.

It's a moral/ethical issue for me..one that supercedes marriage building.