Why did you cheat?

philologos

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Staying in a relationship for your family when you want sex with other people can also cause damage to individuals, I'm not arguing it's more damage but realise that monogamy can also cause suffering.

Sometimes you need to work at your marriage, and recognise that as a result of your commitment that you are to stay with him / her. People will find other people attractive, but we have to use our head and realise that love and family are far more important than a quick shag with someone else.

What do you value more? Sex? Or a strong relationship and family?

Where do your priorities lie? If it is sacrificing the stability of your family and your partner for sex with someone else, I'd have to say that inherently that seems selfish to me.

Marriages and relationships go through rocky times. It's not impossible to work this stuff out, but it does require putting others before you sometimes.

Shenshen

Howard Fat Tummy wrote: »

You really can't see the difference between your partner playing golf with someone and putting his penis in someone else's vagina?
Nothing against polyamorous arrangements, but sex is just about the most intimate thing you can do with someone. Don't think it's OTT to expect your partner not to shag other people.

Depends how much you're into golf, I suspect.

But generally speaking, sex is as intimate as you yourself want itto be, no more, no less.
The way I see it, I love my husband, but I don't own him or his body. And he doesn't own me. There are few things I enjoy more than knowing he's enjoying himself. Better still, seing him enjoying himself

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

Sometimes you need to work at your marriage, and recognise that as a result of your commitment that you are to stay with him / her. People will find other people attractive, but we have to use our head and realise that love and family are far more important than a quick shag with someone else.

What do you value more? Sex? Or a strong relationship and family?

Where do your priorities lie? If it is sacrificing the stability of your family and your partner for sex with someone else, I'd have to say that inherently that seems selfish to me.

Marriages and relationships go through rocky times. It's not impossible to work this stuff out, but it does require putting others before you sometimes.

I'm currently in an open relationship, we both love eachother, if we ever have to "work" on our relationship I'll consider ending it as relationships won't be enjoyable if it requires work. I want relationships where both of us make the choice every day to stay or leave. I don't want her to be with me because she has to. If she doesn't enjoy our relationship I want her to end it.

UCDVet

philologos wrote: »

According to whom? In marriage you make vows to one another to express commitment to one another.



Not just in theory. Also in practice.

Oh, and if people are entering to a relationship without the intent of staying or remaining faithful, they have the responsibility to make that clear to their partner so they can make a decision about what to do. Otherwise, that's deceit, you've not been forthright about your intention.

The very idea behind people changing over time is that people often have to work at marriage / relationship.



To be brutally honest with you these figures only come about due to a change in philosophy about marriage in the case of divorce. When we say till death do us part. How much of us mean it? I hope to God that in the event that I get married, I'll mean it completely and utterly, in both mind and heart and commit myself to making that end come about.

As for breaking up in a relationship if you genuinely feel that it isn't working out, that's the honourable thing to do rather than cheating behind someones back.



This is why trust is and should be at the centre of a relationship. We trust one another until there is a clear sign that that trust is or has been violated. Often finding someone who shares your values, or your beliefs is a huge huge help in this. This is why many people I know from church for example, marry other Christians. They know what the ethical philosophy that Christianity has concerning a relationship or a marriage is straight off the bat.

Do you think there is more to life than sex? Honestly. It is the West's idol of choice it seems. You see it everywhere. We've become obsessed with it. If people claim that the Victorian era was the age of being a prude (I'm not even all that sure about that claim), then certainly the 21st century has an unhealthy obsession with sex. To be honest I'd hope there was more meaningful things in my life by the time I leave this world.



Is "missing out on sex" all that matters? Really? When I hear stuff like this, I start to wonder if this is based on any meaningful thought at all. When people claim to be "rational" or "logical" in criticising marriage, or anything else, it really comes down to blind hedonism or as I've put more crudely already, following your balls.

You've made an awful lot of claims; but you've stated them as fact without giving any supporting evidence. The fact of the mater is, people DON'T have to be honest, people don't have to honor their vows, people don't have to work at their marriage, people don't have to not cheat.

You can TRUST someone all you want; but that doesn't mean they won't violate their trust.

Anyway, by definition, anytime you give up doing X because you are doing Y - there is an opportunity cost of X. It doesn't matter what X is - if it's something you'd have wanted to do - by doing Y and giving it up; you experience a cost. Whether it's traveling Europe or banging drunk chicks.

You can call it following your balls or whatever else - but so long as people *want* to follow their balls, if they don't because they are in a relationship - they are experiencing a cost. They are losing out on an activity that they would have otherwise enjoyed doing.

Shenshen

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Yes but you and your husband intend to spend it with other people as well.

What, you never spend time with other people, ever?

JuliusCaesar

flutterflye wrote: »

I don't know why everyone's giving op a hard time.....

What am I missing here?

The fact that he didn't and doesn't intend to withstand temptation; that he seems to be unaware of the impact of cheating on his partner. He wouldn't like to be cheated on himself, and presumably it hasn't happened (at least not to his knowledge) or he might have a better idea of how it might feel.

Pottler wrote: »

I could cheat, I've had/have loads of opportunities, but I wouldn't, because I actually care for my wife and family, and I wouldn't make little of THEM by cheating.

UCDVet wrote: »

So, in short - if you remain faithful your partner can still leave you or cheat on you. In the end, your single *and* you've missed out on sex you wanted to have.

You may have missed out on sex, but you can hold your head high, knowing that you have behaved in an honorable way, in a way that is respectful of the other person - that you have behaved better than the cheating partner.

Grayson

philologos wrote: »

That's your position, I'm not really all that sure if you can really believe that.

However, expecting other people to change the course of common morality and their conscience to suit your philosophy is just not going to happen. Irrespective of how liberal we might profess ourselves to be, most of us still value commitment, most of us still value fidelity, honesty, family, and love in society. I don't think that will ever change.

Most of us come up with differing reasons for this, but I know for sure what mine is.

Did you read my whole post?

philologos

UCDVet wrote: »

You've made an awful lot of claims; but you've stated them as fact without giving any supporting evidence. The fact of the mater is, people DON'T have to be honest, people don't have to honor their vows, people don't have to work at their marriage, people don't have to not cheat.

What evidence? - That it is fundamentally immoral to cheat on someone else? Or that philosophy surrounding sexuality has changed in the last 60 years? Or that people idolise sexuality in the 21st century over love and often self-sacrificial commitment to another person? Or that there is a selfishness in putting sexual hedonism above your partner or your family?

People don't have to be honest. Things tend to work out better for everyone when they are with very few exceptions. We need to live ethically. It's fine to say that I can be as unethical as I like in this respect. Where does it stop though? It spills over into everything and it leaves only destruction.

People don't have to work at their marriages, that's right. This is partly down to why there are so many divorces in the 21st century, and so many children in broken homes in the West. The question is what is the right thing to do, or am I just interested in myself?

These things are all apparent.

UCDVet wrote: »

You can TRUST someone all you want; but that doesn't mean they won't violate their trust.

That's true. I have no problem with that. Trust is at the core of human relationships and ethics. Ultimately no matter how much you want to cheat, the problem is that there is right and wrong, good and evil in this world, and that all your actions have consequences.

UCDVet wrote: »

Anyway, by definition, anytime you give up doing X because you are doing Y - there is an opportunity cost of X. It doesn't matter what X is - if it's something you'd have wanted to do - by doing Y and giving it up; you experience a cost. Whether it's traveling Europe or banging drunk chicks.

The question is whether or not the cost is worth it, and as far as I can tell, it will never be worth sacrificing your family for a quick shag when all is said and done.

To be honest with you. The main reason why I posted on this thread is because it annoys me no end to see people justifying adultery or cheating.

UCDVet wrote: »

You can call it following your balls or whatever else - but so long as people *want* to follow their balls, if they don't because they are in a relationship - they are experiencing a cost. They are losing out on an activity that they would have otherwise enjoyed doing.

The question as I've phrased above, is whether or not the cost is worth it. There's a bigger cost by the way to splitting up your family for a quick shag.

People talk far too much about what their rights are in the West. What about our responsibilities? What about right and wrong? What about good and evil? What about doing something to make this place we live in better for our children (although I never believe it will be perfect)?

Maybe I'm talking till I'm blue in the face, but I think there are many people who will read this who believe the same things I do in this respect.

philologos

Grayson wrote: »

Did you read my whole post?

Yes I did. When I got to the part about comparing it to eating I got a bit sceptical to be honest with you.

UCDVet

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

The fact that he didn't and doesn't intend to withstand temptation; that he seems to be unaware of the impact of cheating on his partner. He wouldn't like to be cheated on himself, and presumably it hasn't happened (at least not to his knowledge) or he might have a better idea of how it might feel.





You may have missed out on sex, but you can hold your head high, knowing that you have behaved in an honorable way, in a way that is respectful of the other person - that you have behaved better than the cheating partner.

You might as well declare that moving your rook in a game of chess as 'cowardly and dishonorable'....

You're playing at a significant disadvantage by following rules that are not enforceable. If you lose, you can hold your head high; but you still lost. The other people who have no problem moving their rooks are going to do so, and out perform you.

By all means, play Chess however you like. But what really matters are the enforceable rules, not the rules people kinda sorta feel *should* be followed by may or may not be followed.

HeyThereDeliah

Shenshen wrote: »

What, you never spend time with other people, ever?

Is remaining faithful to each other not part of the marriage ceremony?

I'm not sure if your original post was said in jest tbh to make you look cool or something.

As for me and my husband due to work commitments we don't live together full time so ya I spend time with other people as does he like friends do.

Shenshen

HeyThereDeliah wrote: »

Is remaining faithful to each other not part of the marriage ceremony?

I'm not sure if your original post was said in jest tbh to make you look cool or something.

As for me and my husband due to work commitments we don't live together full time so ya I spend time with other people as does he like friends do.

Not as I'm aware. It certainly wasn't in ours. But it might be in religious ceremonies, I wouldn't know about that.
I don't think either of uswould have gone for that promise. We promissed to be honest with each other, which I personally think is far more important.

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

What evidence? - That it is fundamentally immoral to cheat on someone else? Or that philosophy surrounding sexuality has changed in the last 60 years? Or that people idolise sexuality in the 21st century over love and often self-sacrificial commitment to another person? Or that there is a selfishness in putting sexual hedonism above your partner or your family?

People don't have to be honest. Things tend to work out better for everyone when they are with very few exceptions. We need to live ethically. It's fine to say that I can be as unethical as I like in this respect. Where does it stop though? It spills over into everything and it leaves only destruction.

People don't have to work at their marriages, that's right. This is partly down to why there are so many divorces in the 21st century, and so many children in broken homes in the West. The question is what is the right thing to do, or am I just interested in myself?

These things are all apparent.



That's true. I have no problem with that. Trust is at the core of human relationships and ethics. Ultimately no matter how much you want to cheat, the problem is that there is right and wrong, good and evil in this world, and that all your actions have consequences.



The question is whether or not the cost is worth it, and as far as I can tell, it will never be worth sacrificing your family for a quick shag when all is said and done.

To be honest with you. The main reason why I posted on this thread is because it annoys me no end to see people justifying adultery or cheating.



The question as I've phrased above, is whether or not the cost is worth it. There's a bigger cost by the way to splitting up your family for a quick shag.

People talk far too much about what their rights are in the West. What about our responsibilities? What about right and wrong? What about good and evil? What about doing something to make this place we live in better for our children (although I never believe it will be perfect)?

Maybe I'm talking till I'm blue in the face, but I think there are many people who will read this who believe the same things I do in this respect.

Everything we ever do is selfish. When we donate to charity we do it because it feels good. When we don't cheat the motivation is to either avoid guilt or to not risk the pain of breaking up your family.

Absolutely everything we do us selfish.

When people refer to selfishness what they are really referring to is social violation. For example if you agree to scratch someone's back in return that they scratch your back and they don't that is called selfish. It is no more selfish than adhering to the agreement. People either seek to minimise pain, maximise pleasure or a trade off of both. The only reason people are "selfless" is because they are selfish. Selflessness doesn't really exist.

hatrickpatrick

IMO, if you want to get with someone else you have a duty to break up with your current partner first. You owe them that. Going behind their back but pretending otherwise is incredibly bent.

Same if you "lose interest" in your partner sexually, you owe it to them to break up instead of trapping them in a situation where you don't want them but they can't have anyone else.

The world would be a far, far better place if more people told the hurtful truth instead of lying to keep people happy. I've been on the receiving end of two faced bullsh!t in my own life and I can honestly say I would have been much happier if I'd been told to my face what was going on so I could move on with my own life instead of sticking around believing things could still work.

JuliusCaesar

UCDVet wrote: »

You might as well declare that moving your rook in a game of chess as 'cowardly and dishonorable'....

Eh? It's meant to move! It's meant to move in straight lines. If I move it diagonally, I'm cheating, and my opponant will call me on it. Chess does have agreed rules.

UCDVet wrote: »

You're playing at a significant disadvantage by following rules that are not enforceable. If you lose, you can hold your head high; but you still lost.

Enforceable rules = laws.

A relationship generally has agreed rules. Fidelity is generally one of them. I'm not talking about open relationships, that's a different topic altogether.

There's no winning or losing in relationships - just experiences. A relationship is neither a competition nor a war.

HeyThereDeliah

Shenshen wrote: »

Not as I'm aware. It certainly wasn't in ours. But it might be in religious ceremonies, I wouldn't know about that.
I don't think either of uswould have gone for that promise. We promissed to be honest with each other, which I personally think is far more important.

Yes I agree honesty is important too.

If everyone's happy that's all that matters. Temptation is a fact of life it's resisting it we struggle with.

Grayson

philologos wrote: »

Yes I did. When I got to the part about comparing it to eating I got a bit sceptical to be honest with you.

So you decided to write all that without actually reading the post.

fair enough.

mauzo

I cheated because I was his punch bag and I wanted intimacy, so I got it elsewhere.

I'm ashamed of that, didn't have the guts to leave and knew he wouldn't find out. Of course I Made the mistake of admitting it, that didn't end well for me, although I deserved it. It ended the relationship then, thank god.

I'd much rather be able to hold my head high and say no, I've never cheated. Hopefully I'll remain faithful in future relationships, I think I will...but I won't know until I'm faced with it. I'd like to think I've learned from my mistakes and will have enough respect for my partner in future and value our relationship.

Scanlas The 2nd

I see a similarity between cheating and eating unhealthy food. You know you shouldn't do it but the important question is whether or not you can resist the temptation.

philologos

Grayson wrote: »

So you decided to write all that without actually reading the post.

fair enough.

I read your whole post. I just disagree strongly with your philosophy.

That's why I said "Yes" in response to the question had I read your post.

UCDVet

JuliusCaesar wrote: »

Eh? It's meant to move! It's meant to move in straight lines. If I move it diagonally, I'm cheating, and my opponant will call me on it. Chess does have agreed rules.



Enforceable rules = laws.

A relationship generally has agreed rules. Fidelity is generally one of them. I'm not talking about open relationships, that's a different topic altogether.

There's no winning or losing in relationships - just experiences. A relationship is neither a competition nor a war.

Exactly.

In a chess tournament, there are official rules and someone who cheats will be disqualified. You need to play fair to win.

In relationships - there aren't rules. We can pretend there are; but it only works to the extent that our partner also does. Certainly not in pre-marriage relationships.

Since there aren't enforceable rules; not cheating because 'it's against the rules' is silly. There aren't rules.

philologos

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Everything we ever do is selfish. When we donate to charity we do it because it feels good. When we don't cheat the motivation is to either avoid guilt or to not risk the pain of breaking up your family.

Tripe. When we don't cheat we show that our family and our partner is more important than sex. When we don't cheat and we put our energy into our relationship to restore it, we show that we can improve things, or we can bring things back to the way they were.

Avoid guilt? - you're not guilty unless you've done something wrong.
Risk the pain of breaking up your family - It's self-sacrificial. By the by, just because sometimes relationships or marriages may be on the rocks doesn't mean that they can't get out of them. It's the common assumption that life is meant to be perfect, and that we can't fix anything. The reality is life won't be perfect (at least not this one), and that we can fix things.

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Absolutely everything we do us selfish.

No, not everything is selfish. A lot of the things we do are, but self-sacrifice still exists in this world. Indeed, one case of self-sacrifice changed the entire world forever. But I can get into that another time

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

When people refer to selfishness what they are really referring to is social violation. For example if you agree to scratch someone's back in return that they scratch your back and they don't that is called selfish. It is no more selfish than adhering to the agreement. People either seek to minimise pain, maximise pleasure or a trade off of both. The only reason people are "selfless" is because they are selfish. Selflessness doesn't really exist.

Many times, people do things which are right to their detriment. Those are the type of people I respect and look up to.

I disagree, selflessness does exist, and I've seen it a few times. It's rare, but it does exist.

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

Tripe. When we don't cheat we show that our family and our partner is more important than sex. When we don't cheat and we put our energy into our relationship to restore it, we show that we can improve things, or we can bring things back to the way they were.

Avoid guilt? - you're not guilty unless you've done something wrong.
Risk the pain of breaking up your family - It's self-sacrificial. By the by, just because sometimes relationships or marriages may be on the rocks doesn't mean that they can't get out of them. It's the common assumption that life is meant to be perfect, and that we can't fix anything. The reality is life won't be perfect (at least not this one), and that we can fix things.



No, not everything is selfish. A lot of the things we do are, but self-sacrifice still exists in this world. Indeed, one case of self-sacrifice changed the entire world forever. But I can get into that another time



Many times, people do things which are right to their detriment. Those are the type of people I respect and look up to.

I disagree, selflessness does exist, and I've seen it a few times. It's rare, but it does exist.

Name one example of a selfless act.

Take self sacrifice for example. Imagine someone jumping in front of an oncoming truck to save his child's life. He does that to avoid the pain of losing his child, the reward of saving his child is greater than the expected loss as a result of being run over.

philologos

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Name one example of a selfless act.

Take self sacrifice for example. Imagine someone jumping in front of an oncoming truck to save his child's life. He does that to avoid the pain of losing his child, the reward of saving his child is greater than the expected loss as a result of being run over.

What about the firefighters who went into the WTC over 11 years ago to save peoples lives with the knowledge that they may never come out alive? Is that selfish?

This is without looking to the most obvious example of self-sacrifice I can think of, which Western culture has been soaked in for over 2,000 years.

This example also applies into what I believe about marriage quite heavily. To a large degree, it is a sacrifice.

flutterflye

philologos wrote: »

What about the firefighters who went into the WTC over 11 years ago to save peoples lives with the knowledge that they may never come out alive? Is that selfish?

This is without looking to the most obvious example of self-sacrifice I can think of, which Western culture has been soaked in for over 2,000 years.

This example also applies into what I believe about marriage quite heavily. To a large degree, it is a sacrifice.

Oh good god!
If Jesus did infact exist, he was awfully delusional if he thought he was sacrificing himself to save humanity or whatever the fcuk he's supposed to have done!
Feckin bringing christianity into this thread.
Ridiculous!

McChubbin

Relevent:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Lll964Z1fk

Benny_Cake

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Everything we ever do is selfish. When we donate to charity we do it because it feels good. When we don't cheat the motivation is to either avoid guilt or to not risk the pain of breaking up your family.

Absolutely everything we do us selfish.

People do good things without expecting anything in return though. Take someone who cares for an dying relative. They will get nothing in return for spending time and money taking care of that person. Or someone who risks almost certain death to save others. It might be rare but it happens - selflessness does exist.

billybudd

People cheat because they lack the courage and strenght to give their partners the choice of either agreeing to extra affairs or leaving, its that simple.

flutterflye

Benny_Cake wrote: »

People do good things without expecting anything in return though. Take someone who cares for an dying relative. They will get nothing in return for spending time and money taking care of that person. Or someone who risks almost certain death to save others. It might be rare but it happens - selflessness does exist.

You must have missed that episode of friends.
Joey proves selflessness doesn't exist.

Benny_Cake

flutterflye wrote: »

You must have missed that episode of friends.
Joey proves selflessness doesn't exist.

I've spent the last 10 years or so avoiding the repeats. But if Joey proved it I might have to reconsider!

Brain Stroking

Open relationships are a grand concept until you realise your wife/husband is getting FAR more sex than you

Gummy Panda

flutterflye wrote: »

Feckin bringing christianity into this thread.
Ridiculous!

Why not?

Benny_Cake

Brain Stroking wrote: »

Open relationships are a grand concept until you realise your wife/husband is getting FAR more sex than you

Those guys with wives / partners that make people say "what the hell is she doing with him?". I can see how open relationships mightn't work for them.

Jev/N

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

Name one example of a selfless act.

Take self sacrifice for example. Imagine someone jumping in front of an oncoming truck to save his child's life. He does that to avoid the pain of losing his child, the reward of saving his child is greater than the expected loss as a result of being run over.

Holy f*ck, my new cynicism detector is working!

See ya later sarcasm detector. :pac:

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

What about the firefighters who went into the WTC over 11 years ago to save peoples lives with the knowledge that they may never come out alive? Is that selfish?

This is without looking to the most obvious example of self-sacrifice I can think of, which Western culture has been soaked in for over 2,000 years.

This example also applies into what I believe about marriage quite heavily. To a large degree, it is a sacrifice.

philologos wrote: »

What about the firefighters who went into the WTC over 11 years ago to save peoples lives with the knowledge that they may never come out alive? Is that selfish?

This is without looking to the most obvious example of self-sacrifice I can think of, which Western culture has been soaked in for over 2,000 years.

This example also applies into what I believe about marriage quite heavily. To a large degree, it is a sacrifice.

The firefighters fighters did it to get the pleasure of saving lives, pride of doing a tough job, self image, avoid shame, maybe some thought they'd go to heaven, make family and peers proud etc..

Selfishness gets a a really bad name, a lot of good can come from selfishness.

twistedbrains

i cheated as i wanted the wife to taste her pussy of my bell end and see if she would turn lessie and leave me to be a male slut

Shenshen

Shenshen wrote: »

Depends how much you're into golf, I suspect.

But generally speaking, sex is as intimate as you yourself want itto be, no more, no less.
The way I see it, I love my husband, but I don't own him or his body. And he doesn't own me. There are few things I enjoy more than knowing he's enjoying himself. Better still, seing him enjoying himself

Not much chance of an accidental pregnancy or an STI playing golf, I wouldn't imagine. I don't think you can compare playing golf or having a coffee to that physical intimacy. I'm not talking about emotional intimacy.

blacklilly

Gauss wrote: »

That was years ago, I'm single now.

But in similar circumstances I'd more than likely do it again.

You sound perfect, I'm a sucker for men like you, I think we should go out

Internet Hero

don't cheat

Shenshen

Howard Fat Tummy wrote: »

Not much chance of an accidental pregnancy or an STI playing golf, I wouldn't imagine. I don't think you can compare playing golf or having a coffee to that physical intimacy. I'm not talking about emotional intimacy.

That's what contraceptives are for, and medical checkups.

So your objection to extra-marital sex is safety concern? I do agree that caution certainly is strongly advisable.

philologos

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

The firefighters fighters did it to get the pleasure of saving lives, pride of doing a tough job, self image, avoid shame, maybe some thought they'd go to heaven, make family and peers proud etc..

Selfishness gets a a really bad name, a lot of good can come from selfishness.

Sounds like you're trying to change the definition of both selfishness and self-sacrifice. I have far more respect for the firefighter who puts others before himself, the man who makes sacrifices for the good of his relationship and his children over the man will cheat on their wife and break their family. I just have to hope that God makes me a man like that all the more.

What is pride after the grave? Self-image can't go with you after the grave. Shame can't go with you. The going to heaven argument is questionable unless you can show a good argument that was a motivation.

I don't think any of those thoughts were there very much other than let's save lives to be honest. But I'll leave you to semantics.

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

Sounds like you're trying to change the definition of both selfishness and self-sacrifice. I have far more respect for the firefighter who puts others before himself, the man who makes sacrifices for the good of his relationship and his children over the man will cheat on their wife and break their family. I just have to hope that God makes me a man like that all the more.

What is pride after the grave? Self-image can't go with you after the grave. Shame can't go with you. The going to heaven argument is questionable unless you can show a good argument that was a motivation.

I don't think any of those thoughts were there very much other than let's save lives to be honest. But I'll leave you to semantics.

It's irrelevant whether pride comes with you "after the grave". It's a payoff. There's a payoff for every action we take. When people put others before themselves they do it for the payoff. That payoff could be other people liking them, egotistical ( validating your self image as a good person), getting pleasure from helping others etc. there's always a payoff otherwise people wouldn't do what they do.

JuliusCaesar

UCDVet wrote: »

In relationships - there aren't rules. We can pretend there are; but it only works to the extent that our partner also does. Certainly not in pre-marriage relationships.

Since there aren't enforceable rules; not cheating because 'it's against the rules' is silly. There aren't rules.

:rolleyes: I wonder are you trolling again.

The 'rules' of a relationship are mutually agreed rules between the couple involved. Most couples expect fidelity of each other (except for open relationships, which is a different topic), and usually make this explicit somewhere along the line.

The rule is enforceable by leaving the unfaithful partner.

philologos

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

It's irrelevant whether pride comes with you "after the grave". It's a payoff. There's a payoff for every action we take. When people put others before themselves they do it for the payoff. That payoff could be other people liking them, egotistical ( validating your self image as a good person), getting pleasure from helping others etc. there's always a payoff otherwise people wouldn't do what they do.

What payoff? How can you get pleasure when you're in a building engulfed with flames and you're almost certain you're going to die? What will any of those things do for you after the grave?

Sounds a little far fetched to me.

I should have suspected your question show me one case of self-sacrifice would be met with fobbing off the answer when one is clearly provided. The dictionary definition of self-sacrifice is the following:
"Sacrifice of one's personal interests or well-being for the sake of others or for a cause."

I don't know how you could see that as not being self-sacrificial under that definition.

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

What payoff? How can you get pleasure when you're in a building engulfed with flames and you're almost certain you're going to die? What will any of those things do for you after the grave?

Sounds a little far fetched to me.

I should have suspected your question show me one case of self-sacrifice would be met with fobbing off the answer when one is clearly provided. The dictionary definition of self-sacrifice is the following:
"Sacrifice of one's personal interests or well-being for the sake of others or for a cause."

I don't know how you could see that as not being self-sacrificial under that definition.

I asked you to provide one example of selflessness? You failed to provide one because it doesn't exist. It is mythical.

For those firefighters wimping out of their job was worse than possible death. The payoff was to avoid the shame of wimping out and not performing their duties.

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

What payoff? How can you get pleasure when you're in a building engulfed with flames and you're almost certain you're going to die? What will any of those things do for you after the grave?

Sounds a little far fetched to me.

I should have suspected your question show me one case of self-sacrifice would be met with fobbing off the answer when one is clearly provided. The dictionary definition of self-sacrifice is the following:
"Sacrifice of one's personal interests or well-being for the sake of others or for a cause."

I don't know how you could see that as not being self-sacrificial under that definition.

I asked you to provide one example of selflessness? You failed to provide one because it doesn't exist. It is mythical.

For those firefighters wimping out of their job was worse than possible death. The payoff was to avoid the shame of wimping out and not performing their duties.

Shenshen

Shenshen wrote: »

That's what contraceptives are for, and medical checkups.

So your objection to extra-marital sex is safety concern? I do agree that caution certainly is strongly advisable.

Pointing out that physically, at least, having sex with others is nothing like playing golf.

I don't have an objection to extramarital sex (simply pointing out that it's silly to compare it to other everyday activities) - on a personal level, yes, sexual health would be a huge concern. Medical checkups aren't going to help once you've caught something incurable and quite a few STIs (wart virus, herpes) don't show up on routine sexual health screens.

philologos

Scanlas The 2nd wrote: »

I asked you to provide one example of selflessness? You failed to provide one because it doesn't exist. It is mythical.

For those firefighters wimping out of their job was worse than possible death. The payoff was to avoid the shame of wimping out and not performing their duties.

Except I did provide one, and you're fobbing it off. The dictionary definition gives you a clear definition of what it is. There's no point entering into a discussion if you're going to shift the semantical goalposts at every opportunity. There's better things I can be doing.

Scanlas The 2nd

philologos wrote: »

Except I did provide one, and you're fobbing it off. The dictionary definition gives you a clear definition of what it is. There's no point entering into a discussion if you're going to shift the semantical goalposts at every opportunity. There's better things I can be doing.

If you are referring to Jesus' alleged self sacrifice he could have done it for the satisfaction of helping others. But I think that story is at least partly made up.

kowloon

Tendencies towards self sacrifice, with no tangible benefit for the individual can strengthen a species. Maybe we don't have it to the same degree as an Ant protecting the colony, but we have some altruistic traits that can't be explained by weighing the cost against the benefit. For all the talk about how risk averse humans are, we can do what seems like some really dumb stuff for others.

Anyway, back to gossip about cheating and teh sexy time.