SurvivingInfidelity.com^®

My therapist said I intellectualize everything.

Therapists say that because they typically come at issues with an amoral stance predisposed to postmodern subjectivity and living mostly in the realm of emotion. I’m not dismissing emotions. But when a therapist says this it’s because they seem, at least in my own experience, to be trying to drag you down into the muck of relativism where everything gets murky. So you’ll go back to sleep again.

My therapist said I intellectualize everything.

Therapists say that because they typically come at issues with an amoral stance predisposed to postmodern subjectivity and living mostly in the realm of emotion.

If I may present an alternative view and quote both my psychiatrist (who also practises as a psychotherapist, just not in my case) and my therapist. They both complain that I intellectualise everything and point out that it's harmful in the long run, because intellectualising emotions is actually a sophisticated form of suppression.

Suppressed negative emotions will ultimately find an outlet, usually in the form of aggression which can be directed outwardly or inwardly. Outward aggression can lead to all sorts of social problems, whereas inward aggression usually manifests as diminished self-esteem, lack of self-confidence and feelings of helplessness and hopelessness. All those can lead to or deepen depressive states.

According to both, allowing yourself to feel emotions instead of approaching them as something to be studied and analysed acts as a sort of catharsis leading to a sense of liberation in due course. Personally, I don't feel particularly liberated but what they say makes sense to me.

Perhaps asking your therapist why they think intellectualising is bad could give you some insight into their motives, line of reasoning and therapeutic modality.

The interesting thing about psychotherapy is that it has been almost wholly repudiated by the scientific community. While I don’t discount that it can be helpful in the same way that, say, reading great literature can be helpful, it seems that the psychotherapy theories of the human mind, grounded almost wholly in Freud’s inaccurate and even totally false conceptions, seem almost totally without empirical basis.

It's not really surprising as psychotherapy is non-quantifiable by any standards, let alone strict standards required for proper scientific analysis and investigation. In this sense it's more akin to an art than a science and it probably won't ever gain full approval of those more scientifically-minded.

Here's another one: Point out the logical fallacies of a WS but have an emotional connection with someone behind your spouse's back.

Psychotherapy has been repudiated by the scientific community? So ... people who live in their heads refuse to accept the power of emotions.... I'm not shocked.

One of the therapists I worked with went from HS diploma to Ph.D. for his work on the Manhattan project. He became a therapist after retiring as a physicist. Some part of 'the scientific community' may repudiate psychotherapy. Other members of the community understand it's a work-in-progress.

True, we can't predict the course a person will take the way we can predict the path of a projectile, and we probably never will, because human beings are more varied than projectiles. But you keep trying to minimize the emotional aspects of life, and that just won't work.

Recognizing fallacies is an important skill in life. It doesn't become important only after infidelity occurs. Recognizing a WS's fallacies may help a BS detach, but IMO the cure for the BS starts with looking inside, figuring out what the BS wants, figuring out what is possible, and above all, resolving the emotions - the anger, grief, fear, and shame - that come with being betrayed.

[This message edited by sisoon at 10:37 AM, April 26th (Monday)]

Yep ^^^ Sisoon nailed it.

Though I do think it's important not to buy into what the WS is telling you. That's hard to understand early on when it's the person who you have navigated so much life with.

Thumos,

Modern Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (most talk therapy these days, but not all) is almost completely divorced from Freud's psychoanalysis.

My only beef with CBT is that it primarily teaches you how to take a punch better. Not necessarily how to stop getting punched.

Modern Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (most talk therapy these days, but not all) is almost completely divorced from Freud's psychoanalysis.

I’ve heard a lot of good things about CBT and bonus it’s based on real brain science - but I’d argue way more talk therapy is using psychotherapy than you’d think

That's hard to understand early on when it's the person who you have navigated so much life with.

Precisely why I think the list of fallacies is helpful for betrayed folks. I don’t discount emotion at all. But I do think especially in the earlier days, emotions can really mislead a BS. Having some grounding in empiricism and logic helps to disconnect a little bit and cut through the white noise and static they are typically getting from a WS.

So ... people who live in their heads refuse to accept the power of emotions.... I'm not shocked.

This seems like a logically fallacious description of humans who happen to be scientists. That said, if I’m paying a lot by the hour for someone to provide me with allegedly clinical advice and thoughts, I’d like for their advice and thoughts to be based on something other than mysticism.

I find that comment interesting coming from someone who is devoutly religious.

Our emotional life has a lot to do with our spiritual life.

More important, logic - thinking - does not provide much solace when one has been betrayed.

Wow. It would be hard to come up with a statement that I disagree with more than that one.

Is that usually the problem that a betrayed partner faces when they "just find out" or even later on? That they are "too logical"?

I haven't seen that being overly logical is the issue for betrayed partners when they initially find out - have you observed differently?

In my observation, when one is betrayed, they tend to be nearly ALL EMOTION and very little logical thinking.

And it generally leads them down a path that leads to more hurt:

- They run around not believing their own eyes because the truth hurts too much - "it can't be true" or "it was only an emotional affair"

- They are distraught and forlorn and make themselves the problem - blaming themselves for their partner's betrayal

- Upset and emotional they are unable to control themselves - they confront too early without enough knowledge of what is really going because they are so upset - leading themselves into a place where they are gaslit and the affair goes underground

- They are lovesick and decide right away to take the other partner back and "fix the marriage - "no matter what"

And so on.

***

***

***

And once a betrayed partner enters the phase of actually dealing with infidelity, they are bombarded with these logical fallacies by the cheater - also known as "bullshit excuses" - who is merely trying to continue cake-eating or perhaps get out of trouble.

Frequently the betrayed spouse buys into the logical fallacies - because it makes them feel better emotionally temporarily, but then they find themselves back at square one.

***

***

***

I would disagree that logic does not provide much solace. That logic is usually exactly what the betrayed partner needs in order to stop the gaslighting and emotional abuse being heaped upon them.

I mean come on, when a betrayed spouse shows up on Just Found Out and they are a total MESS!, do we say to them: "You know, your husband is having an inappropriate relationship with 2 women, and randomly leaving the house for hours while you take care of the kids, you really need to look at this more emotionally."?

Or do we tell them:

"First, you need to look at this clearly: this is not your fault. He's lying to you, when he is leaving the house, it is most likely to meet with one of these women that he is telling you he is supporting in her time of need. He might be telling you [insert logical fallacy here], but the real truth is he is being selfish, doesn't care about your emotions, and even if want to stay with him, you need to find out the truth and protect yourself with these [insert concrete steps] and please, don't accept abuse just because you love someone."

It's best always to think straight and talk straight, but one has to act on the basis of thought and emotion - and whene they conflict, emotion almost always rules - eventually, if not immediately.

It almost seems as if you are arguing against the "straw man fallacy" that somehow the purpose of this thread was to utilize only logic and eliminate emotion.

I know that Thumos, myself, and others have advised betrayed spouses to channel their emotions - but in a logical way, so they do not leave themselves open to manipulation (logical fallacies).

But I do agree that emotion wins very frequently. That's not always bad, but it often is. Luckily, we have places like Surviving Infidelity and others as well, where we try to help betrayed souses cut through the "emotional noise" and give them a set of tools to help themselves, logically.

[This message edited by faithfulman at 6:18 PM, April 26th (Monday)]

Anyway, I don't know why this thread has been turned away from such a useful set of information, seemingly searching for arguments that have not been made.

Please let me know if they have already been pointed out.

So I have a couple more logical fallacies. Thumos, etc. please help me with identifying them, I actually will actually need to utilize them in a couple of days:

***

The "It's too late" logical fallacy

Often employed by a cheater prior to confrontation: "I crossed this line before, I might as well continue cheating because it is too late to stop now"

I find this is also employed after the cheating has been discovered: It's too late for me to do the right thing by you now (come clean, stop lying, go no contact) because I have hurt you so much already.

***

The "I lied/continued to lie to protect you" logical fallacy

I think this one is so absurdly common that it needs no example, and serves as a way for a cheater to keep on doing the wrong thing or simply protect themselves from consequences.

***

The "how could I/she/he know?" logical fallacy

I have been served this one by no fewer than three therapists - one actually said: "That's why people end up in court, because they cannot think of all the rules beforehand" as if there is nuance and ambiguity in cheating behavior that the cheater hides and lies about.

by the way, I think the best counter to this is: "If you didn't know/understand, then why did you hide or lie about it?"

Of course at this point, the betrayed spouse should be prepared to be blamed with: "Because you would be mad" or "You wouldn't understand" etc. Which I believe is another logical fallacy.

***

I had another one that I forgot, if I remember it I will post again.

Thumos, I will happily compile all the fallacies and their names and if you like, you can edit your post at the top to include all that you think make the cut.

Threadjack

My only beef with CBT is that it primarily teaches you how to take a punch better. Not necessarily how to stop getting punched.

I can hear that, but IMO it depends. For example reframing is focused on changing the distortions your brain goes through. If you're constantly looking at things in one particular way, you may be seeing punches where none exist. CBT can help change your thought patterns to recognize this so that you realize the "punch" was never really a punch to begin with.

End threadjack

I can hear that, but IMO it depends. For example reframing is focused on changing the distortions your brain goes through. If you're constantly looking at things in one particular way, you may be seeing punches where none exist. CBT can help change your thought patterns to recognize this so that you realize the "punch" was never really a punch to begin with.

Yes - this is true. Logic is okay, but you do not know at what point you are bending it to where it's actually distorted. And, that's where I am with this post.

I think it's very helpful to have the logic of a situation for reasons I think were just illustrated over the last few posts. Sometimes the only thing we can do is make the next best logical decision until our emotional life can become more balanced.

The only thing that I disagree with is that it's a strawman argument to say that there would only be logic. I would say we witness times when the logic can actually become a barrier that keeps a person stuck.

There is no WS here that made a logical decision to cheat. And, honestly I don't think there is any BS here that made a complete logical decision to R. Though I think some made a logical decision to remain married - those would be the ones who stay in their situation to reach a goal such as the kids being raised or getting their career to a better place. R is beyond that - it's the decision and commitment of having the marriage you hoped for despite the betrayal.

However, getting your emotions to catch up to some of your logic is a big climb. I see some BS and a lot of WS have a closed feedback loop in their head for a long period of time. Our thoughts are not truth, and our emotions are based on our thoughts. Sometimes we can bend things to match logic but then they become distorted. So, while we can look at something logically, when we focus so much on that it can become a coping mechanism that keeps distance and understanding at bay.

I am not really talking about a "new" BS or WS. I think we have to almost ply them with logic because they are in such an imbalanced emotional state. When we make decisions or base things only on emotions you have the same problem. That's where this post is most useful.

It's difficult for me to take in that everything has to be scientifically proven, and "not mystical" from someone who is religious. There are these things called hope and faith. While I agree, those two things may not have a lot of place in a newly found out infidelity. But, those who are in R know that you can't do it without hope and faith.

Secondly, I do feel that Thumos's admission about having communicated with another woman (albeit maybe innocently and intermittently) with at least a modicum of romantic interest in her - it smells funny to me. It was enough that they had to break of contact and it was during a time where he was most set on divorce. It makes me feel a little bit suspicious of the fact that after that broke off he kind of put the whole divorce thing on pause.

Is everything on the up and up? Probably. I mean he went NC, his wife knows about it. But, to me there was a lack of accountability in that post with the admission that now seeps into my mind when I read his posts like this. It reads do as I say not as I do. I am sorry, it just does. Some of that is probably because of my own situation being projected on his, but some of it is because you can't talk yourself into or out of certain emotions - you have to change the way you think about them.

I have watched this poster use his logic for such a long period of time that I believe it keeps him a bit stuck. Emotionally he wants to be with his wife but also not be with his wife, so he is stuck there as well. I get it - his wife has not done the work that she should even after being specifically coached about what that was. However, there was at least some suspicious activity that maybe wasn't cheating but none of these fallacies are seemingly evaluated on that side of the fence. This is the exact reason that Sisoon's post wasn't a strawman argument. You can bend logic. You can also bend emotions based on your thoughts and framing. Logic is not all black and white as this post might make it seem - it incorporates your values, your beliefs, your (sometimes faulty) perceptions. There is not one universal truth here.

I am not advocating that Thumos be considered a WS, and I am not calling him one. Not at all. I am using his situation to explain blind spots in all our logic. It's not all based on proven facts, it's still based on opinion and personal value.

I am also NOT saying that logic should not be a great tool in one's toolbelt. Overall, I am only saying the decision to really R (not just stay married) is not a logical decision. It's a logical AND an emotional decision. You will never find logic in what a WS did, it defies any logic because it was a purely emotional decision. You have to be willing to let other factors in with the logic, and you have to be careful not to create a long term barrier if R is what you ultimately want.

R is not for everyone, nor is D. This advice in this string is helpful for newbies but at some point in the journey, if you are deciding to R (which I know that Thumos has not decided that) then you still have the work to get to at least the compassion piece. Empathy is not a word that is useful from a BS towards a WS about an affair. That is way too tall of an order. BUT - it IS needed surrounding some of the things that led to it and some of the work being done as a result of it. At that point, you can seriously use logic as a shield.

Shields are useful for a certain period of time, especially that first year. After that, you really have to be careful to evaluate what it is you want. If it's to stay married, then you have to put down some of your shields slowly over time in order to let back in that faith and hope component.

Balance. Emotions and Logic are both useful tools. When someone is new, emotions are ruling, we try and get them back to more logic. When too much logic is used long term then I would suggest working back towards the middle. In the end, the decision to R, D, or stay in limbo all require that balance.

[This message edited by hikingout at 9:57 AM, April 27th (Tuesday)]

That said, if I’m paying a lot by the hour for someone to provide me with allegedly clinical advice and thoughts, I’d like for their advice and thoughts to be based on something other than mysticism.

Good therapists know they can't know what is best for clients. They do not provide answers. Good therapists help clients find their own answers.

Therapy/IC will not work for someone who looks to the therapist/IC for solutions to that someone's problems.

More important, logic - thinking - does not provide much solace when one has been betrayed.

Wow. It would be hard to come up with a statement that I disagree with more than that one.

Often what one most objects to is exactly what hits home.

The statement is about solace, not about problem-solving. You're seeing an either-or where there isn't any ... a false dichotomy.

*****

Focusing on WSes' fallacies gives away too much power to WSes. Focusing on anything WSes say after d-day gives away too much power to WSes.

The way for a BS to thrive after being betrayed is to go inside, figure out what the BS wants, and find the strength and resources -which in most cases the BS already possesses - to get as much of what the BS wants as possible.

After d-day, nothing a WS says should be taken in unless it's verified independently. Whether a WS's statement is good or fallacious thinking, it doesn't matter.

The answers that will help a BS will come from inside each individual BS, irrespective of what the WS says.

*****

Recognizing fallacies is something we all should be doing in daily life. This thread contains a good list of fallacies to watch out for.

[This message edited by sisoon at 10:19 AM, April 27th (Tuesday)]

Secondly, I do feel that Thumos's admission about having communicated with another woman (albeit maybe innocently and intermittently) with at least a modicum of romantic interest in her - it smells funny to me. It was enough that they had to break of contact and it was during a time where he was most set on divorce. It makes me feel a little bit suspicious of the fact that after that broke off he kind of put the whole divorce thing on pause.

HikingOut, I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time here. This is a threadjack. I’m happy to address it in my thread in the D/S section if you want to do it there, where it belongs. No I don’t consider myself a WS nor does my WW for very good reasons. But this thread needs to remain focused on providing BS’s with a good set of tools. I don’t appreciate attempts to derail that discussion (and I’ll warrant neither do a lot of BS’s).

Trying to catalog or list all the methods, excuses or reasons a WS might give after d-day in order to get a logical grip on the situation…

I just hope there is enough free space on the Internet!

Frankly I see little to gain in this. You won’t debate your way out of infidelity, nor can you apply logic to make a WS end the affair.

You definitely can use common sense and logic to work YOUR way out, and if the BS has some of both they might follow. But it won’t be because you can convince your WS that they are using Tu Quoque or Red Herring falacies.

Have only red the intro post which was very interesting. Where do you think the following lands

Mrs TD to TD

All those books you’ve read, all those counselling sessions, they’ve all been a waste of time because they didn’t help you get over it.

🙄 😂