An event contains more than one person can register.
Consider one argument. It includes words, timing, tone, pauses, facial movement, body state, recent stress, earlier conversations, private intentions, and the history each person brings into the room. Neither person can register all of it.
Your nervous system selects some characteristics. Attention gives some of them more priority. When you describe the argument, words select again. The word “disrespect” may organize the experience, but it cannot contain every part of what happened.
Omission does not make experience false.
Selection is necessary. You could not function if every possible characteristic received equal attention. The problem is not that information gets left out. The problem begins when your current description feels complete.
“They ignored me” may fit what you experienced. It also contains an inference about intent. Asking what was left out can reveal other relevant information: where their attention was, what state they were in, what else was happening, or whether the pause had another function.
Use the question to regulate certainty.
The question does not require you to abandon your first reading. It asks you to hold certainty in proportion to the available evidence. A conclusion can remain firm while still remaining open to relevant information.
- What I directly observed.
- What I inferred or evaluated.
- What information could change my conclusion.