not 2 sides, but 3

It wasn't until today, did I realise that there aren't just 2 sides to any story, as the common saying goes There's two sides to every story, but I found there to be more. Has anyone considered the finding of 3 sides to every story? There's the [a], the [b], and let's not forget the [truth]! The most important part to any story.

I've found that what we should do in life is a fine tuning of the following; believe half of what you see, quarter of what you hear, eighth of what you read - this way you will be free to make a decorous decision or begin to achieve a conception of how things really are. I'm like everyone else - I see the world in terms of what I would like to see happen, not what actually does.

A friend of your's becomes involved in an arguement with someone, but you're not there to see it, you only hear about it. Willingly, you listen to what you friend says, you sympathsis with them, you offer them advice, but most importantly, you believe it. Then the other person comes along your way - let's say you're also their friend, but not as strongly. Of course, you offer a weeping shoulder to them, and same crap, different story. Now what? You've managed to aquire yourself two stories, part conflicting, part adhering - who do you believe?

You know you want to believe the friend that you serve closely and loyally, but don't want to listen any jargon they might spin and go about living on and believing a lie. What do you do? Remember how I said not to forget that other party? [truth], this will be able to tell you exactly what happened, fill in the missing gaps, and also confer the parts from [a] and [b] to match equally. From this, we are able to derive what the real McCoy is in this daring story between your two friends.

That which is true or in accordance with fact or reality is what you want to hear, and should only hear. This magical property is such a simple thing, but in the day-and-age that we live in; nothing is simple. Nothing is easy. Everything is complicated. To find [truth], I would suggest that any source that is not inundated with any affiliation with any of the [a] or [b] of the original situation. From this, the pieces that make up the first two will come together and we'd have our resolution. The only problem is, that [truth], to be present, not affiliated and not signed over in any way, shape or form to the [a] or [a] is rather a difficult task to find, but when you do, you can complete the story.

Like I tried to explain, and a little clarification, we see the world how we want, not for what it really is, this is because we have our own version, they have theirs, and then there is the truth in every story to how it really happened.