Rational justification for Polygamy?

The catch-all forum for general topics and debates. Minimal moderation. Rated PG to PG-13.
Post Reply
_Daniel Peterson
_Emeritus
Posts: 7173
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 6:56 pm

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _Daniel Peterson »

harmony wrote:Without reciprocity, it's the ol' patting harmony on her po' lil head again.

It was a sincere offer of help. I'm sorry that you prefer to view it as condescension.
_Paul Osborne

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _Paul Osborne »

I have to agree with Daniel about Harmony disliking men.

:sad:

Paul O
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:I hadn't really understood it before tonight, harmony, but I'm beginning to see that you genuinely dislike men.


Yes, I genuinely dislike some men. I genuinely dislike men who think women are only useful as wombs. I genuinely dislike men who think they stand between me and God. I genuinely dislike men who think they are qualified to patronize me when they don't even know me. I genuinely dislike men who self-servingly use their power to subjugate those they see as of less worth than themselves.

I'm sure you aren't in any of those catagories, though.

If true, that explains a lot of disparate things that have puzzled me about your posts.


Keep being puzzled; you missed the mark.

If it's true, I'm genuinely sorry. I myself would hate to live in a world in which I disliked and mistrusted half of its population a priori. That would be perfectly awful.


Have no fear. It's not true.

As it is, I like people. Everywhere. Men and women. Different religions. Almost all of them. I really do.


Me too. Amazing, isn't it?
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Yoda

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _Yoda »

Paul Osborne wrote:I have to agree with Daniel about Harmony disliking men.



Paul O


Knowing Harmony as long as I have, and through the conversations I have had with her, I can assure you this is not the case.

If she disliked men, she certainly wouldn't still be married to the same man she has been married to for several decades.

Harmony just wouldn't put up with that type of BS. :lol:
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _asbestosman »

I've been reading a book about human nature which has made me think a bit about polygamy, monogamy, and other human relationships. The book mostly talks about adults, not children so what I say about children is based primarily on what I've heard about jealousy in children and my own thoughts.

By nature, women want a long term relationship with a man who is likely to be a good daddy. They don't want to have to compete with other women's children. Jealousy serves a great purpose.

Children also experience jealousy of their siblings. Sibling rivalries are hard for kids at times. They don't want to compete with siblings for the attention and care of their parents and in some ways this is good for their own survival.

That's not to say the the jealousy of children is similar to that of adults for each other. For one thing, adults invest a lot of energy into maintaining the family structure. Having another adult take away from that is in some ways more unfair since the other adult has to pick up the slack. The child isn't personally invested in quite the same way since the child does not provide labor to the family unit--the child simply receives less when sibling arrive (at least until they learn how siblings often make the most convenient friends).

Women also, by nature, are more attracted to men with the higher testosterone men when they are most fertile. The combination of the two makes for the best chances for their offspring.

Now none of that means women (or men or children) are defined by natural inclinations nor are all such inclinations equal in importance, intensity, or moral validity. I also don't think that's the full story on why polygamy is so hard but I think it's part of it. However, much of our moral reasoning is based on a more intuitive part of our brains. Many things we simply see as wrong or right even when we can't quite explain it. Moreover psychology has shown that we will often try to find reasons after we've reached a conclusion.

That's not to say that intuitive reasoning is bad. With training, it is very often superior to analytical thinking in both speed and accuracy. Psychology has demonstrated this with various games proving that we are often more rational when we make choices intuitively than when we deliberate.
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_Paul Osborne

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _Paul Osborne »

I'm glad to hear that Harmony has a long marriage. That's great.

But I still think she dislikes men in general when I consider how many of them might easily offend her because of their values and belief.

Paul O
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _harmony »

Daniel Peterson wrote:
harmony wrote:Without reciprocity, it's the ol' patting harmony on her po' lil head again.

It was a sincere offer of help. I'm sorry that you prefer to view it as condescension.


I'm sure it was and I appreciate the offer. However, you just got through telling me flat out that I'm wrong, with no caveats and no doubts that my inspiration was in error. I see no softening of that stand, so what kind of help did you have in mind? Do you expect to change me? Show me the error of my relationship with God?

While it isn't outside the realm of possibility that I am wrong, your comments don't show respect for the answers I was given, nor is our shared past one that would allow me to know of your respect for my path and my decisions. You are orthodoxy; I am not. Do you respect that in me, find value in that as it pertains to me? Or do you view me with pity, because I cannot and will not be what you are?

I'm not even sure you have any idea how hard this is for me.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_harmony
_Emeritus
Posts: 18195
Joined: Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:35 am

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _harmony »

liz3564 wrote:For the record, from what I have observed based on conversations I have had with both Gaz and Dan, I would put them in that same category, even though I still have differences in my understanding of all of this.


Any man who supports polygamy in any way is not in that catagory, Liz.

The only one I know like that is Jason Bourne.
(Nevo, Jan 23) And the Melchizedek Priesthood may not have been restored until the summer of 1830, several months after the organization of the Church.
_Yoda

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _Yoda »

asbestosman wrote:I've been reading a book about human nature which has made me think a bit about polygamy, monogamy, and other human relationships. The book mostly talks about adults, not children so what I say about children is based primarily on what I've heard about jealousy in children and my own thoughts.

By nature, women want a long term relationship with a man who is likely to be a good daddy. They don't want to have to compete with other women's children. Jealousy serves a great purpose.

Children also experience jealousy of their siblings. Sibling rivalries are hard for kids at times. They don't want to compete with siblings for the attention and care of their parents and in some ways this is good for their own survival.

That's not to say the the jealousy of children is similar to that of adults for each other. For one thing, adults invest a lot of energy into maintaining the family structure. Having another adult take away from that is in some ways more unfair since the other adult has to pick up the slack. The child isn't personally invested in quite the same way since the child does not provide labor to the family unit--the child simply receives less when sibling arrive (at least until they learn how siblings often make the most convenient friends).

Women also, by nature, are more attracted to men with the higher testosterone men when they are most fertile. The combination of the two makes for the best chances for their offspring.

Now none of that means women (or men or children) are defined by natural inclinations nor are all such inclinations equal in importance, intensity, or moral validity. I also don't think that's the full story on why polygamy is so hard but I think it's part of it. However, much of our moral reasoning is based on a more intuitive part of our brains. Many things we simply see as wrong or right even when we can't quite explain it. Moreover psychology has shown that we will often try to find reasons after we've reached a conclusion.

That's not to say that intuitive reasoning is bad. With training, it is very often superior to analytical thinking in both speed and accuracy. Psychology has demonstrated this with various games proving that we are often more rational when we make choices intuitively than when we deliberate.


Very interesting observations, Abman! :smile:

Putting this into a gospel perspective, do you think that a "natural" abhorrence to polygamy is an example of something that we struggle against as part of "the natural man"?

Again, I'm just confused about why God would put such a huge obstacle in the way of something that He supposedly finds so primarily important for all of us to partake in as part of our ultimate exaltation....if that is, indeed the case.
_Paul Osborne

Re: Rational justification for Polygamy?

Post by _Paul Osborne »

I'm not even sure you have any idea how hard this is for me.


You said something earlier about tears. It must be hard. Hang in there!

:smile:

Paul O
Post Reply