Man, it’s so great to have the honor of a philosopher reading your work, allows you to get real granular about words, context, and so on.
I think it’s somewhat reflexive, so I guess you could say both, although in that particular line, I meant it constitutes the truth and that’s the part I’m trying to get people to see here.
As an example, you might believe you’re a bad friend for always being late. Once you uncover that belief in your head, it has now revealed the truth about your objective behavior (if you are always late, that is). But from here on out, continuing to hold on to that belief won’t reveal any further insights. It’ll just confirm and perpetuate the behavior.
Now you have to flip a switch and say okay, this is the old truth now and it’s not serving me, so I need to constitute a new one by believing I’m someone who’s not late — and then try to back that up with the corresponding, objective behavior.
Does that make sense?