Marriage and Infidelity Issues - Assignment Example

Philosophy Student’s Name Institution Affiliation Exposition Richard Taylor Conventional definitions of sex and love and fidelity have undergone radical changes in the modern times. The functions of sex in the society have changed in this generation. The rise of factors such as birth control has altered the dominant perspectives on the issues of sex. Traditionally, sex was a factor of creation and used to take place within marriage. However, sex has been disassociated from the original societal forms and normative functions. It is a consequence of the social fibre decay. Fornication or extra marital sex used to be a taboo, but due to the influence of the western ideals, it is no longer a taboo. There is greater freedom accorded to sexual choices in the modern society. This has led to the recognition that sexual, social and emotional commitments are wholly independent. Even within the institution of marriage, traditional views on sex have radically changed. Richard Taylor, in his book titled “Love Affairs: Marriage” and infidelity explores the issue of extramarital affairs in great depth. Taylor defines an extramarital affair as a relationship outside one's marriage where a romantic or sexual encounter occurs. An extra marital affair involves cheating on one's spouse when one engages in a sexual, emotional, or passionate encounter with another person of the opposite sex outside the marriage (Taylor, 1997). Taylor deeply creates an understanding of why people engage in extra marital affairs and how the damage an affair causes can be lessened. In this book, Taylor writes in defence of affairs arguing that affairs have value in the society. First, he argues that love is the highest good in the society. No other social good can provide more satisfaction to a human being more than love. Therefore, he posits that if one can get love from an affair, then the affair is valuable because it is providing the highest good in the society. He argues that an affair can be considered bad if it does not have love. Secondly, Taylor argues that affairs are valuable because they act as a perfect complement to marriage. He argues that a marriage may not provide one or both of the partners with the needs it is supposed to provide. This means that affairs normally provide those needs that a marriage cannot provide (Taylor, 1997). According to Taylor, some affairs provide more satisfaction to those who engage in them more than marriage provides. He asserts that, in some cases, affairs have been able to strengthen marriages because when one partner involves in an affair outside marriage, the couple is forced to sit down and evaluate the problems afflicting their marriage (Taylor, 1997). Taylor, in defence of affairs also argues that affairs create excitement, recognition, affection and strengthens the self-esteem of those who engage in it. He argues that, in most cases, people engage in affairs because of lack of recognition, affection, and excitement in their marriages, which lowers their self worth and self esteem. Taylor also argues that spouse jealousy is a natural phenomenon, which is bad and destructive, but relationships and marriages should not be threatened by affairs because they act as complements (Taylor, 1997). Taylor refutes the popularly held view that extra marital affairs are trivial and self-indulgence. He argues that affairs should not be underestimated because they serve a very important role in life. He argues that affairs are not driven by selfishness or desire for selfish gain. He asserts that they seek to satisfy a need that is not being met by a relationship or a marriage (Taylor, 1997). Therefore, an affair is not trivial because it provides a solution to the problem. He argues that it would be rational for people under certain conditions to have affairs. For example, a woman who whose husband is sexually dysfunctional would be justified if she had an affair, according to Taylor. However, he argues that there are some other circumstances where it would not be rational to have an affair. For example, in the case of a couple that does not have problems in their relationship or marriage, but is separated by distance, having an affair would not be rational because it is not solving any solution (Taylor, 1997). Such an affair would be trivial and self-indulgent. According to Taylor (1997), fidelity is remaining faithful to a marriage partner in a fruitful relationship. The word fruitful is important in that definition because it implies that fruitfulness is a key factor for fidelity to exist in a relationship or marriage. The example of a married couple on page 106-107 illustrates his views on genuine fidelity by clearly showing that genuine fidelity can only exist in strong and fruitful relationships. Taylor does not challenge the conventional belief that one should only have sex with those they love or those to love. In fact, he cements this belief that sex without love does not have any emotional or psychological function (Taylor, 1997). This physical contact solves physiological needs. About casual affairs, he would treat them as trivial forms of self-indulgence that satisfy lustful feelings. Bonnie Steinbock On the other hand, Bonnie Steinbock holds a very divergent position on the issue of adultery and fidelity. Steinbock believes that adultery is morally wrong. In her book, she says " I do not condone adultery and though I do not accept the traditional rationale of absolutism, there cannot be any other behaviour in a marriage that can be any worse than adultery...She also rejects the arrangements called open marriages which are characterised by a form of deception that does not make adultery look like betrayal" (Steinbock, 1986). In her opinion, multiple partners are very inconsistent with the commitment and intimacy that are inherent in marriage (Steinbock, 1986). According to Steinbock there are some relevant conceptual relations between sex and love. She argues that sex in isolation is a mere physical activity that serves a physiological function. It solves physical desires of the body without addressing emotional and psychological needs. However, sex in the presence of love creates intimacy. It creates an emotional bond and between two partners which effectively meets the emotional and physiological needs of the partners. She argues that sex in the presence of love unites the partners into one body because of the emotional connection that exists between them. Steinbeck argues that sexual infidelity carries the risk of falling in love with the other party, thus betraying one’s spouse emotionally (Steinbock, 1986). She argues that sexual infidelity starts as a trivial sexual indulgence meant to satisfy temporary sexual needs, but it can degenerate into an emotional and psychological connection between partners in an affair, leading to an unbreakable bond. This can lead to transfer of love and affection from one's spouse to the partner they are having an affair with (Steinbock, 1986). Steinbock does not agree with Taylor on the significant meaning of marriage fidelity. While Taylor’s meaning of marriage fidelity is relative, Steinbocks meaning is absolute. According to Steinbock, no circumstance in which infidelity should be justified. Though Taylor argues that fidelity only makes sense in a fruitful marriage or relationship, Steinbeck maintains infidelity is an irrational reaction that is not justifiable by any circumstance (Steinbock, 1986). She asserts that infidelity is a coward reaction by those who are not ready to solve problems facing them in their marriages or relationships. This form of escapism entails reluctance to face the reality and deal with the issues at hand. In the case of Taylor's couple, Steinbeck would argue that the couple should go for counselling to confront the issues facing them instead of resorting to infidelity. Even within traditional marriage set up, Steinbock feels that adultery is not permissible. However, it can be understandable in a remote case where a couple has failed to get a child and one partner engages in adultery in search of a child (Steinbock, 1986). Steinbeck argues that sexual exclusivity is an ideal aspect of marriage because it protects the partners in a marriage from the adverse effects of adultery and infidelity. Sexual exclusivity creates fruitful, fulfilling, and satisfying marriages where the couples are responsive to the needs of the others (Steinbock, 1986). Sexual exclusivity in marriage creates stable marriages and sets good examples to the children in a marriage. It also protects the couple from the health, emotional and psychological risks associated with adultery and infidelity. In the case of an open marriage, Steinbock argues that adultery is morally permissible if the other partner does not feel betrayed by the action of one partner. However, it is highly unlikely that she would accept open marriage as a better or an equally good alternative to infidelity because the risks posed by infidelity are also highly inherent in open marriages (Steinbock, 1986). Evaluation and Original Position Taylor's position on adultery is flawed because it threatens the institution of marriage. Though he acknowledges that extramarital affairs are not trivial forms of self-indulgence, arguing that they are caused by dysfunctional marriages and relationships, proposing extra marital affairs as an alternative are shallow and escapist. Extra marital affairs indicate the reluctance of one party to solve the problems facing their marriage or relationship. Therefore, it provides temporary solutions to one party and avoids pursuing permanent solutions that can benefit both partners in a relationship or marriage. Furthermore, his position on extramarital affairs is flawed because it does not address the issue of betrayal caused by the affairs. It does not address the risk that extra marital affairs pose to the other partner in a relationship or marriage, and how to minimise those risks. He only defends extramarital affairs without critically examining the alternatives to extra marital affairs so that he can justify why extra marital affairs are the best alternative. However, his position on unfruitful relationships is justifiable. It is rational for one partner to have an extra marital affair if the problems facing the partners in the relationship or marriage are beyond repair. Some problems like chronic and consistent sexual dysfunction and childlessness can lead to justifiable extramarital affairs. Conventional morality states that if one is in an unsatisfactory relationship or marriage and feels that they need to find romantic love with another person, then they should separate and divorce. Taylor would argue that separation and divorce have more serious and expensive consequences than extramarital affairs. Steinbeck position on infidelity and adultery in marriage and relationship has several merits. First it supports problem solving in marriages and relationship instead of resorting to escapist measures that provide temporary solutions. The position is in line with conventional social norms on marriage and sex, and is unlikely to have a negative effect on the moral fiber of the society. However, her absolutism poses several problems for those in marriages and relationships that are very unfruitful. Her position does not provide exit options for those that have tried to solve problems in their marriage and have not been successful. Though fidelity is paramount in marriage, infidelity is rational in some circumstances. Steinbock holds a more reasonable position than Taylor because it respects the moral fiber of the society and conventional norms on marriage and sexuality. Taylor’s position is dangerous and a threat to the institutional of marriage and relationship. Steinbeck position would be improved if she gave rational grounds under which infidelity is permissible because absolutism is likely to portray her as an irrational moral police. Therefore, her conclusion can be altered to indicate that adultery within marriages and relationships can only be justified when one of the partners have failed to meet the needs of the other partner due to physical, biological or psychological inadequacies. In essence, in my opinion, it is morally wrong to engage in adultery. Despite how scholars may argue, adultery has never been and will never be an appropriate behavior. Extramarital engagements have negative effects on everyone in society. Engage in sexual immorality reveals moral decay. Such behaviors should be discouraged vehemently in order to have a morally upright society. Just as adultery used to be a taboo in the past, the current rotten generation should uphold such a practice to avoid the painful consequences. References Steinbock, B. (1986). What’s wrong with Adultery? Center for Philosophy & Public Policy, 6, 760-766 Taylor, R. (1997). Love affairs: Marriage and infidelity. NY: Prometheus Books Read More