Truth is subjective. There is absolute fact, of course… but the truth, is all about perception. If there are two people involved in an encounter or interaction, the facts can remain constant, but their perceptions of the truth can be completely divergent from one another. There can be agreements of truth, regardless of the facts. Facts can happen, but like a statistical analysis, the story that we weave with our interpretations of the facts can sometimes leave the events that actually occurred in the dust. When facts are omitted from a story, events that actually happened never make it into a person’s version of the truth… and a non-truth is never uttered by the story teller – is this lying? If the story teller relies on the imagination of the listener to fabricate the story tendrils and, in all honesty, complete the lie; is this still truth-telling? A lie told with good intent is still a lie? Is it better to close a door with the truth or to allow a separate path to be taken with a half-truth/home-brewed lie?
I am wrestling with this. I am seeking the truth. I am also seeking closure. Do the facts actually support the truth I’m hearing? Does this truth give me closure? Is my closure possible with the absolute truth, or do I need to spin and twist it to fit my wounded pride? What if the story-teller is incapable of releasing the factual truth? What happens if the story-teller has spun so many half-truths that they can’t recall the facts? Who wins? Is it better to walk away?
I’ve made the difficult decision to ask for the truth. The factual truth. I don’t know how capable the story-teller is with recalling the facts.
I’ve opened the box, I can’t walk away. I just hope that I can receive the closure and maintain a friendship. As with everything, I can only control what I can control. Everything else should be graciously released to the tides.