Responses...
Which suggests that everyone always acts on what they belief to be the truth, versus what is easiest, most expeditious, least costly, etc.
I disagree. I would argue that in a situation like this a person ultimate actions is NOT definitive proof of what they believe / believed was the case. In other words, just because things go "badly" for a person post knowing their spouse was unfaithful, or even because they react badly, does not mean they would have preferred to not know, or that they would have been better of not knowing.
If I have a terminal disease, I am not going to react well to finding out...and that reaction will PROBABLY include denial (you know, the seven steps and all that). That doesn't mean I would have preferred to not know, and die without knowing what killed me, or without making proper preparations.
Accordingly, no matter how you "observe" someone react to this news of their spouse being a cheat, you cannot judge what they ultimately do with that information...be that external "actions" that you did not observe, or internal "actions" that you have no clue about.
Because you seemed to think that anyone who doesn't believe their wife will cheat on them is an irrational fool...suggesting that you have a general non belief in the concepts of hope and faith.
I did.
It was an admitted guess....that I based on your implication that believing you will succeed in the face of statistical odds against you is irrational. My point was that in NON-RANDOM situations...like a baseball batter at the plate...like a hockey defense man taking a shot from the point....one's approach to the situation has an absolute impact on the outcome...and a inability to believe you will succeed it certainly a recipe for failure...thus those who are successful believe they will succeed. A basketball player always believes his next shot will go in (else he wouldn't take it), even though it has a less than 50/50 change of doing so.
By the same token...it is hard to imagine a successful marriage between people who believe it is going to fail...and hence I would not call a guy who didn't think his wife would cheat (in lieu of obvious signs in advance that she would) "irrational".
While I agree with this statement on its own...I disagree with your premise. People get married EXPECTING IT TO SUCCEED...not thinking it might.
And I have seen plenty of hockey players display absolute shock that a shot didn't go in...because they thought THAT shot was on a line directly to the back of the net. Do they do this with every shot? No...they don't, because experience has in fact taught them that the majority of shots don't go in...and it has also taught them which shots are more likely to go in then not.
However, most people don't take 150 marriages a year...don't have the benefit of having been through multiple marriages before....and by definition, any marriage that has ended (freeing the person to marry again) was a "failure", so even with that experience they STILL would not have much data in which to make an objective decision about how successful their marriage will be.
Despite all that however, they have reason to think their marriage WILL succeed because 30% do. And they are not irrational to think that a best effort by both parties will put them in that 30%.
Yes, because they could then act accordingly, whatever that might be. I will always firmly believe that information is invaluable, and that as long as the information is accurate and relevant, there is no such thing as 'too much". The more you know to base a decision on, the better decision you can make.
Bud Plug said:That's an easy one to answer. Actions speak louder than words.
Which suggests that everyone always acts on what they belief to be the truth, versus what is easiest, most expeditious, least costly, etc.
I disagree. I would argue that in a situation like this a person ultimate actions is NOT definitive proof of what they believe / believed was the case. In other words, just because things go "badly" for a person post knowing their spouse was unfaithful, or even because they react badly, does not mean they would have preferred to not know, or that they would have been better of not knowing.
If I have a terminal disease, I am not going to react well to finding out...and that reaction will PROBABLY include denial (you know, the seven steps and all that). That doesn't mean I would have preferred to not know, and die without knowing what killed me, or without making proper preparations.
Accordingly, no matter how you "observe" someone react to this news of their spouse being a cheat, you cannot judge what they ultimately do with that information...be that external "actions" that you did not observe, or internal "actions" that you have no clue about.
Bud Plug said:Huh? Where did this come from? Were we even talking about love? Or was this some kind of ad hominem argument? Doesn't matter.
Because you seemed to think that anyone who doesn't believe their wife will cheat on them is an irrational fool...suggesting that you have a general non belief in the concepts of hope and faith.
Bud Plug said:Should I guess that you did?!![]()
I did.
Bud Plug said:(Although you couldn't be more wrong about my sports background, past or current. I'd be curious as to what made you leap to this particular conclusion. It might provide some insight as to the judgments you've made about some of the other people (friends, etc) mentioned in your posts).
It was an admitted guess....that I based on your implication that believing you will succeed in the face of statistical odds against you is irrational. My point was that in NON-RANDOM situations...like a baseball batter at the plate...like a hockey defense man taking a shot from the point....one's approach to the situation has an absolute impact on the outcome...and a inability to believe you will succeed it certainly a recipe for failure...thus those who are successful believe they will succeed. A basketball player always believes his next shot will go in (else he wouldn't take it), even though it has a less than 50/50 change of doing so.
By the same token...it is hard to imagine a successful marriage between people who believe it is going to fail...and hence I would not call a guy who didn't think his wife would cheat (in lieu of obvious signs in advance that she would) "irrational".
Bud Plug said:The point is that believing you might succeed is not the same as expecting to succeed.
While I agree with this statement on its own...I disagree with your premise. People get married EXPECTING IT TO SUCCEED...not thinking it might.
And I have seen plenty of hockey players display absolute shock that a shot didn't go in...because they thought THAT shot was on a line directly to the back of the net. Do they do this with every shot? No...they don't, because experience has in fact taught them that the majority of shots don't go in...and it has also taught them which shots are more likely to go in then not.
However, most people don't take 150 marriages a year...don't have the benefit of having been through multiple marriages before....and by definition, any marriage that has ended (freeing the person to marry again) was a "failure", so even with that experience they STILL would not have much data in which to make an objective decision about how successful their marriage will be.
Despite all that however, they have reason to think their marriage WILL succeed because 30% do. And they are not irrational to think that a best effort by both parties will put them in that 30%.
Bud Plug said:Setting aside your argument that your close friends would want to know, in your judgement would they be better off knowing, and if so, why?
Yes, because they could then act accordingly, whatever that might be. I will always firmly believe that information is invaluable, and that as long as the information is accurate and relevant, there is no such thing as 'too much". The more you know to base a decision on, the better decision you can make.

