Plural marriage vs monogamy
Posted: May 9th, 2018, 3:23 pm
Is it morally wrong or ethically inexpedient to have more than one wife?
Philosophy for Philosophers
https://www.onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/
https://www.onlinephilosophyclub.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=15602
Ethical participants in polyamory , or any other moral commitment, will strive to be fair to all the persons involved. Stars are amoral.LuckyR wrote: ↑May 15th, 2018, 2:59 am Assuming that everyone in the relationship goes into it with all of the available information, the problem with plural marriage is neither moral nor ethical. Rather legal, cultural and practical.
A triple star system is inherently unstable and at best ends up as a binary system with a remotely orbiting third star around the center of gravity of the binary stars.
And I am sure it will work great... in years 1-4, how about year 20? Not that binary marriages are immune to problems (far from it), my point is that whatever the risk of trouble is, the impact of trouble is multiplied when you add additional personalities, baggage and quirks into the mix.Belindi wrote: ↑May 16th, 2018, 7:56 amEthical participants in polyamory , or any other moral commitment, will strive to be fair to all the persons involved. Stars are amoral.LuckyR wrote: ↑May 15th, 2018, 2:59 am Assuming that everyone in the relationship goes into it with all of the available information, the problem with plural marriage is neither moral nor ethical. Rather legal, cultural and practical.
A triple star system is inherently unstable and at best ends up as a binary system with a remotely orbiting third star around the center of gravity of the binary stars.
On the other hand, you also add the balancing factors of a potential arbitrator when there is conflict between two of the people, a possible confidant or emotional support when there is a misunderstanding, another person to share the financial burden, child-care and household chores, perhaps reducing the usual stresses on a relationship.LuckyR wrote: ↑May 16th, 2018, 2:36 pm And I am sure it will work great... in years 1-4, how about year 20? Not that binary marriages are immune to problems (far from it), my point is that whatever the risk of trouble is, the impact of trouble is multiplied when you add additional personalities, baggage and quirks into the mix.
No doubt those are valid points and I certainly hope it works out just the way you say, though despite the logic of equality, the pyramid tends to have that pointy top. That is, folks inherently compare and compete. There is a natural tendency to "win" and thereby create "losers". Hence the natural instability of three celestial objects. Theoretically they can coexist equally but here in the Real World there is no such thing as true equality.Alias wrote: ↑May 16th, 2018, 4:16 pmOn the other hand, you also add the balancing factors of a potential arbitrator when there is conflict between two of the people, a possible confidant or emotional support when there is a misunderstanding, another person to share the financial burden, child-care and household chores, perhaps reducing the usual stresses on a relationship.LuckyR wrote: ↑May 16th, 2018, 2:36 pm And I am sure it will work great... in years 1-4, how about year 20? Not that binary marriages are immune to problems (far from it), my point is that whatever the risk of trouble is, the impact of trouble is multiplied when you add additional personalities, baggage and quirks into the mix.
Didn't a wise man say: As usual, it depends. ?
I think this has always been a key problem with ANY system of marriage. Plural marriage is no more likely to make this a problem.
I only say it might work that way. For some people - certainly not all. But then, one+one marriage doesn't work for everyone, either.
How many marriages - or partnerships, of any kind, for that matter - do you know wherein two participants are equal? In the best case, they take turns dominating in particular situations, or areas of responsibility; in most cases, there is a dominant person, or the one who makes most of the important decisions and gets their own way most often, even if they pretend otherwise.though despite the logic of equality, the pyramid tends to have that pointy top. That is, folks inherently compare and compete. There is a natural tendency to "win" and thereby create "losers".
And the notorious stability of tripods.Hence the natural instability of three celestial objects.
"True equality" (ha!) wasn't a prerequisite of marriage.Theoretically they can coexist equally but here in the Real World there is no such thing as true equality.
I apologize for being difficult to understand. You are correct that individuals in binary marriage are not equal. As it happens I wasn't talking about individuals, I was speaking of relationships. Since there is only one relationship in a binary marriage (say A is married to B), then A to B is "equal" to B to A, as they are the same thing. OTOH, in A, B and C marriage, there are subrelationships, A to B and A to C (say A is the male and B and C are female). These can never be absolutely equal. That is the potential source of competition and resentment.Alias wrote: ↑May 16th, 2018, 7:18 pmI only say it might work that way. For some people - certainly not all. But then, one+one marriage doesn't work for everyone, either.How many marriages - or partnerships, of any kind, for that matter - do you know wherein two participants are equal? In the best case, they take turns dominating in particular situations, or areas of responsibility; in most cases, there is a dominant person, or the one who makes most of the important decisions and gets their own way most often, even if they pretend otherwise.though despite the logic of equality, the pyramid tends to have that pointy top. That is, folks inherently compare and compete. There is a natural tendency to "win" and thereby create "losers".
Then, too, there are still quite a lot of people in the world who don't even pretend to strive for equality.And the notorious stability of tripods.Hence the natural instability of three celestial objects.
People are neither - they have all different temperaments, needs and abilities.
"True equality" (ha!) wasn't a prerequisite of marriage.Theoretically they can coexist equally but here in the Real World there is no such thing as true equality.