I'll go back to the topic's title: "Should trust be based on full truth?"
There are very few valid 'shoulds' in recovering from being betrayed. I do think R can't work without authenticity over time, and speaking truth is an integral part of being authentic.
But you ask a good question or make a good point - few WSes come clean on d-day. Few WSes stop lying on d-day. Few BSes take down all their illusions on d-day - most BSes need some time to comprehend the impact of being betrayed.
Maybe a steady increase in authenticity and reduction in lying is enough to support a successful R. I say my W hasn't lied since d-day, and she hasn't lied to me - but I know she has lied to herself. Fortunately, she does so less and less. (Mind you, I suspect I lie to myself, too, but I can't recognize those lies....) I suspect I'd have accepted some TT. I just don't know how much.
Maybe absolute truth is a goal, and a BS may have to accept a learning curve with some mistakes.
*****
You say your boundary is authenticity with you. IMO, it would be very difficult for me to allow myself to lie to some people and require honesty with others. It's just easier, IMO, to aim for honesty with everyone. OTOH, I certainly spun the truth to my mom, who I thought was excessively intrusive. But an objective observer would probably say I lied by omission to her. So ... another double standard rears its ugly head.
Can your W be honest with you even though she may not be with someone else? You know much better than anyone here does.
*****
Somewhere in my life, I decided to trust as my default. The more I get to know someone, the more I may or may not trust them, though. I tend to trust people until they do something that shows they're not trustworthy. IOW, people earn my mistrust, not my trust.
Now, after being betrayed, my default still is trust, but I've become - or made myself -comfortable knowing that I can be betrayed again by anyone at any time. If that happens, I'll have to deal with it, and I will, one way or another. IMO, that's just part of the human condition.
My W has done thousands of trust-building actions in the last 14 years and many more thousands in the 4+ decades before that. And yet she betrayed me. Will she betray me again? I'm as sure as I can be that she won't. Can she betray me again? Hell, yes.
There's no formula or checklist for building trust. It always comes down to one person deciding to trust another - or not. You hold all the power over giving your own trust to someone - and you are the only one who can exercise that power.
I don't know if my W earned trust back. Rather, I think it's more accurate to say that as her authenticity increased, as she got less co-dependent, as she answered my questions, my optimism about our M increased. As she communicated her truth with great consistency, I slowly came to trust her comms. My belief that she was again trustworthy got stronger and stronger. I now trust her implicitly ... except that I know she can betray me. That doesn't feel like cognitive dissonance to me.
But trusting your W comes down to you. You have to decide if her progress is enough for you today. If it isn't, you have to decide if she's on track to build enough trust for you to stay on the R path.
I think the best way to get truly comfortable with your power, responsibility, and risk is to give yourself permission to be wrong. After all, trust and R are about the future, and human beings are simply unable to know what the future will bring.
You say your W is getting more comfortable with the truth. That's a pretty good sign for her IMO, and for you, if you want to stay in a relationship with her....
Tray, The decisions you have to make are difficult. My reco is to have a goodly amount of faith in yourself to figure out what's best for you.
All any of us can do is to make a decision and deal with the consequences.
*****
** Member to Member **
clear explanation of the illogical mental gymnastics some individuals employ to reconcile....
Well, give us a purely logical argument that makes the vow of fidelity more important than all the other M vows combined, because that, in essence, is what you assert.
I would argue I describe integration of my W's whole being (or as much as I perceive), not compartmentalization. Compartmentalization is about separating aspects of one's life - being able to ignore one part while living in another - not thinking of one's partner while cheating, for example.
Rather, I think I describe taking many factors - as many factors as I can identify - into account and figuring out how they combine into a sum for me.
*****
I describe my process to enable a reader to decide to adopt, modify, ignore, or do the opposite of what I've done. That, I hope, helps readers figure out what is best for themself.
IMO, SI works best when members share their thoughts, experiences, feelings ... when they share themselves. There are many ways of surviving infidelity, and sharing the myriad methods people have used is a great service to newcomers. Reading about methods and variations helped me immeasurably in my first 3-4 years after d-day.
Arguments ... were less help to me. Sharing has a high percentage of light as opposed to heat; it's harder to find the light in argument. But I'll argue against bad logic. I'll argue against over-generalization. I'll argue against one size fits all.