Reason as the Leading Motive

We Evolve into Preferring Monogamy

Posted by Jerry on November 20, 2008

People generally can’t quite decide whether monogamy is natural–or even possible–for humans (men, for the most part, I think, tend to pose this doubt). There’s usually debate about the morality of monogamy or multiple partners. Some people believe that monogamy is properly moral, but we are weak-willed humans and therefore cannot live up to the ideal in our relationships.

Others argue that monogamy is unnatural–and offer biologically deterministic arguments in their defense.

I have always held the view that monogamy is neither inherently moral or immoral — a relationship’s morality is the function of the character, values, and virtues of the people involved.

Having said that, I also hold the view that monogamy is a more prudent setup–and that we consciously come to recognize it as such usually only much later in our lives–for reasons that have nothing to do with a person’s character but because of the natural context that evolves around us.

Take this analogy:

When one is younger, one is tempted–and rightly so, I would argue–to try out different majors in college, simultaneously take different courses from different streams, trying to make up one’s mind about what one prefers. Likewise, when it comes to choosing a career, a young person is eager to try different streams; he is likely to switch jobs more frequently, hunt for jobs while staying on his current one for less than a year. A younger person is more open to physical mobility–to relocation, travel, new experiences, and new friends. A younger person has a higher tolerance for transformation, upheavals, and new starts.

As one gets older, the context evolves. People tend to get settled in their careers; their tenure at a job tends to get longer–perhaps even life-long. People tend to decide upon and setup a “base” which they call home, even if they are open to long trips away. People tend to make fewer, but longer-lasting friendships. As one gets older, the tolerance for transformation, upheavals, and new beginnings diminish greatly.

Hence, my argument around the choice of monogamy–and by implication, my views about its morality–takes a similar road. I think it’s primarily a matter of prudence in response to changing contexts.

It is clear that monogamy does not come easily to most people–and certainly not naturally–in the younger days of one’s adulthood. This is due to various reasons that make up the context within which this issue arises. And in my opinion, the reasons are as follows:

  1. For various physical and biological reasons that may differ among men and women, younger people tend to have a greater sexual appetite–not just in terms of frequency but also in terms of variety. (Of course, this does not mean that such “appetites” cannot be controlled or channeled, but that’s not the point here.)
  2. For various psychological reasons, younger people tend to be more resilient to break-ups. Even though while they undergoing one, they might think that a break-up is the end of the world, younger people become quickly aware of the fact that a whole life is ahead of them and that they can move on, that they deserve better, or that they can find another mate.
  3. For reasons similar to the one above, the pressures of maintaining fidelity and abiding by the rules of a relationship tend to be weak among younger people–again, because the end of a relationship is really not the end of the world.
  4. Younger people generally have access to–or are frequently placed in–social environments that open possibilities for exploring outside the relationship (e.g., clubs, colleges, etc.). Moreover, the modern world has opened up innumerable possibilities for younger people to connect with each other–across boundaries, even. (This opens up the tangential issue of whether a person having a purely online affair can be considered to be monogamous.)
  5. Younger people generally have a lower level of tolerance when things don’t go their way in a relationship or when they experience dissatisfaction in an aspect in that relationship.

For the reasons I outlined above, I think monogamy is harder to come by and equally harder to impose upon oneself when you’re young.

As people grow older, however, I think we generally shift our predispositions quite naturally to prefer monogamy–to prefer a kind of stability in romantic relationships. 

It becomes more prudent–more sensible and in accordance with our nature as older adults–that we focus all our emotions, efforts, time, and money on a single partner (and expect likewise in reverse) because this is what lends us the most amount of physical, psychological, sexual, and emotional satisfaction.

To conclude, monogamy or open relationships are neither inherently moral or immoral. However, having said that, I believe that most people will tend towards monogamous relationships later in their lives of their own will as a consciously recognized and evaluated option that is most sensible for them–and hence, properly moral as well. Since what is rationally good for you with your life as the standard, is also properly moral.

10 Responses to “We Evolve into Preferring Monogamy”

  1. Interesting post.

  2. Ergo said

    Actually, I have significant disagreements with this article now. I’ll write out an explanation later.

  3. Wolfgang said

    Barbaric terror in your city. Hope you are okay, my friend!

  4. Ergo said

    I’m physically unaffected by the terrorist activities–and no one I know is affected, although some of my friends have had very close calls. We are all trying to stay low, stay indoors, and monitor the situation carefully. Thanks for your thoughts, Wolfgang.

  5. Nice Blog said

    That is nice to finally find a site where the blogger is very knowledgable.

  6. Adam Parker said

    What are your disagreements?

  7. Varun Shetty said

    You could’ve shortened this article by less than half by saying that monogamy must be a choice and not a rule.
    while some remain satisfied with one partner all their life, some feel the need for more than one.
    Generalization is a disease. And we can’t really have a general idea of how a person will evolve emotionally physically and sexually with age.

  8. Jerry said

    “we can’t really have a general idea of how a person will evolve emotionally physically and sexually with age.”

    Is that a generalization or does it apply only in particular cases to particular people?

    What I’m trying to get at is to show you that generalization is an indispensible mode of holding and acquiring knowledge. In science, it’s called induction. Induction and deductions are valid and justified means of holding and acquiring knowledge; you can’t dispense one or the other.

    Also, the thrust of this article is about the process of evolution in our choices–as it applies to most people. Hence, it had to be substantiated with analogies and details.

  9. Varun Shetty said

    Well, we’re talking about two issues here. One is the the line, “Can’t really generalize…” becoming a paradox of sorts, but a reality. The line obviously applies to some and doesn’t to others. Some fit the “generalisation” u made above and some don’t. That’s precisely what i mentioned above when I wrote “while some remain satisfied with one partner all their life, some feel the need for more than one.” ….May be you missed out that line.

    The whole idea of induction and deduction then takes us to statistics and the basic premise and need of statistics is to get a “general idea” because we can’t count in every single person there is. And we can use it probably if there’s been a large scale study…but then with a large scale study there more chances of errors and the cycle goes on….Now statistics are more accurate with an obviously large sample size, but we mustn’t forget that it never is the true picture. The true picture is always specifics which as humans we can’t really have.
    Statistics works well with numbers, with objects or machines but when it comes to people, the inaccuracies creep in.

    Especially when it comes to psychology, and sexuality, there are so many variables (so to say past experiences, current health, availability of partners etc. etc.) when it comes to these issues, any kind of genralisation will fall short of describing the true picture.

    While the thought of natural progression to monogamy is a fact for many, it isn’t true for a lot of people.
    I don’t refute your ideas and your analogies, but all I’m saying is they are not the complete reality.

  10. jusvoryd said

    So have you evolved to monogamy ?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: