Glory

I think that is the most twisted notion of love I have evr read. You have to hurt her in order for her to appreciate your love? I don't think so.

First of all, I don't think of a loving relationship as at all simmilar to sporting acheivement. Second, why do you assume that a victory is somehow less sweet if it isn't considered impossible? Also, at some point during the game that team must overcome their sense of failure in order to get within one shot of winning. If they remain within one shot of winning the whole time, where does the sense of failure come from? And, you compare a victory by a far superior team to a marraige which has not been tested by infidelity. Do you assume that marraige is a breeze provided their is no cheating? This a vey weak analogy.

If you love your wife, keep your promises to her. If she loves you, she should do the same. The wife you have described is akin to compulsive gamblers. The less certain they are of a good outcome the more fervently they play. I have also observed something simmilar in people dealing with an abuser. When it's good between them and the abuser, it is so good that they are willing to put up with almost any abuse in order to get their reward, the abuser being "good".

What you are describing is an excuse for treating someone horribly. You imply that the extramarrital affair might be "for my wife's own good, though she doesn't know it yet". Yeah right. Sounds a lot like, "why do you make me hurt you like this?".

Someone who knows more about dogs, please adress the abuse of the dog he alludes to.

Glory

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: Glory ]</p>

dangin

deception is necessary in all civil relationships that you want to keep civil.


"yes those pants look good on you"

"Oh, I like your haircut"

"No you don't look fat"

"No, she's not prettier than you"

No, you're more handsome than him"

No, I'm not fucking my secretary"

It's all relative to how much you have to be deceptive about.

Carlos

Your first point seems to be that in overcoming adversity we appreciate the rewards and each other more (basketball and affair examples). I don't think this is always true, but for the sake of argument I'll agree with it.

Your second point seems to suggest that we must instigate the adverse conditions in order to overcome them - including through deception (affair and dog examples). This I disagree with. It's hurtful. You can't predict the outcome ahead of time (if you could, the "rewards" would be meaningless), so you may well end up losing it all.

Consider a couple that has been loving and honest to each other for 50 years - is their marriage more or less perfect than the one you described? Affairs and other deceptions might make some marriages closer - but at what cost? How many more marriages will be broken up by these actions?

It's one thing to survive the hurdles life throws at you. It's quite another to sabotage a relationship and expect the same kind of results.

Gallimore

A purposeful deception might well be a pugnacious approach, and reflects bad character. But my argument is – rather than dismiss deception and infidelity as hazards of marriage, we should recognize that deception is as much a part of a successful marriage as honesty. In some cases deception is adversity disguised, which serves to improve relationship and might have a "heal" value.

As for Glory’s comments, I'd like to make my position clear. I’m trying to be convinced that deception has no effect on successful marriage. My goal is to know how you prove deception is wrong? Otherwise, if you can't maintain an air of competence and feel a need to unleash your hostilities on me, find someone else to deride. Elenchus wastes time and the straw man tactic reflects logical fallacy.

Vibr8gKiwi

Except that it isn't.

You can get into situations where it seems deception is a better alternative than honesty. However by that point there is probably already damage to the relationship and the deceptions just keep an illusion of health to keep the relationship limping along.

The trick is to avoid the above situation by remaining honest (the dishonesty is usually a progressive thing that builds up). If you're already in the above situation, one solution is radical honesty. Tell her you cheated on her and will likely do it again. Tell him you slept with his brother. Let your partner know you're stealing from the company. Whatever it is, come clean, let the chips fall where they may, deal with it, and start the relationship over again this time with everyone having all the facts.

If the relationship cannot survive the honesty, then it was a sham anyway and you would merely prolong an illusion by the deceptions. In such a case you would be better apart anyway.

You really have to ask yourself what is the point of a relationship where you are wearing masks and pretending to be something you're not. If the relationship isn't based on REALITY, what is the point? And you can't have a relationship based on reality when people are being deceptive. Why waste your life in an illusion when you can either fix it, or move on to a real relationship where you were actually compatible with your partner?

The "deception is ok" path leaves everyone in a pointlessly wasted life.

Also there are often strange positives that come from being radically honest. It's seldom as bad as you imagine, even sharing your most closely held secrets. And once the truth is known those secrets don’t hold you back anymore. You can suddenly move the relationship in ways that were impossible before.

Notice I'm not suggesting everyone should be who their partner wishes them to be. Or that everyone has to be a paragon of virtue or whatever. You just have to be honest about it. For example, if you find yourself having this strong bent to cheating, tell her you're cheating. You might find that after all the chips have fallen, you have her permission and its suddenly not cheating anymore. Or you might learn that she cheats too and now you both know and it's not cheating for either of you. On the other hand if she's not ok with it, and wants you to stop (or you want her to stop), and you can't or won't stop, then it's pretty clear what has to happen and it's better that it happens sooner than later. You both get another shot to find someone compatible (and hopefully will be honest from the start). If you are deceptive and continue playing to be different than she thinks, you're just wasting both your lives on an illusion.

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: Vibr8gKiwi ]</p>

Glory

Really? You described deception as one of marraige's "charms". You argued not that it had no effect, but that it had a good effect. You implied that one should not only decieve their partner but that an affair might actually be good for a marraige.



I doubt I can prove that it is wrong. I can say what I think about it. It is manipulative, disrespectful and has proven destructive to many relationships. People don't like to be lied to.



I had no hostility toward you until you insulted me again. Now I am feeling hostile towards you.


Elenchus- Noun, the refutation of another's argument.

Refuting your nonsense is a waste of time? So you were just looking for people to parrot your views?

I built no strawman. I put your examples out in the light of day to be seen for what they are. You have suggested that lieing to one's wife and having affairs is ultimately good for the relationship. You compared this behaviour to abusively training a dog. You implied that one's being upset about having been cheated on and lied to is merely insecurity. Gee, why would someone whose spouse is cheating on them be insecure?

You said it. Now you have to defend it or give it up.

Glory

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: Glory ]

[ November 15, 2002: Message edited by: Glory ]</p>

Gallimore

“Really? You described deception as one of marriage’s "charms". You argued not that it had no effect, but that it had a good effect. You implied that one should not only deceive their partner but that an affair might actually be good for a marriage.”

When you review your posts and eliminate subjective premises, maybe we can go somewhere. You said I described deception as one of marriage’s charms, while it was actually a question. You said I argued that deception has a positive effect on marriage, while it was a clarification of the question. You use words such as “imply,” “suggest,” while I did no such things. I said, “What do you think?” I’m not defending my position. I’m trying to be convinced by a rational argument that deception has no influence on a successful marriage. Is there ever a marriage that is devoid of deception? If not, does it follow that deception is a necessity?


“I doubt I can prove that it is wrong. I can say what I think about it. It is manipulative, disrespectful and has proven destructive to many relationships. People don't like to be lied to.”

There you go. I agree with you, in the case of purposeful deception, that it can be “manipulative, disrespectful, and destructive.” But I’m looking at a bigger picture. That perhaps there is a corrective relationship between opposing forces – that is, without black, there is no white. Without “hot”, we won’t be able to grasp the conception of ”cold.”

Let me amplify with a metaphor. You are like the person who watches a predator kill a prey, and argues against the predator with the prey’s physical exertion as support to your argument. I’m not interested in arguing subjective issues. I want the bigger picture. In the supreme scheme of things, is it true that human relationship depends on the equilibrium of honesty and deception? If that is the case, does it follow that deception is as much a necessity as honesty? If the answer is yes, then does it follow that we ought to dismiss it? Does deception have a positive influence on marriage at all? If it can be observed as “positive,” then just as we can find deception as a frightful mien, so we can call it as one of the “charms” of marriage. Is this valid? If not, then tell me where I am wrong. My interest is purely objective.

“I had no hostility toward you until you insulted me again. Now I am feeling hostile towards you.”

Review your posts, madam.

“Elenchus- Noun, the refutation of another's argument.
Refuting your nonsense is a waste of time? So you were just looking for people to parrot your views?
I built no straw man. I put your examples out in the light of day to be seen for what they are. You have suggested that lieing to one's wife and having affairs is ultimately good for the relationship. You compared this behaviour to abusively training a dog. You implied that one's being upset about having been cheated on and lied to is merely insecurity. Gee, why would someone whose spouse is cheating on them be insecure?
You said it. Now you have to defend it or give it up.”


Elenchus - A specious but fallacious argument; a sophism.

Am I looking for people to parrot my views? If you that’s what you think philosophical discussion is about, then you’re wasting my time. As for your straw man arguments, I would suggest you begin counting your impertinent remarks.

I don’t believe most rational people want to purport to purposeful deception. No one wishes to accept that deception, as we know it is an answer to successful relationship. I’m sure husbands and wives aren’t envigorated or even jovial when he or she concludes that deception is important to their marriage. But this isn’t enough to dismantle the notion that deception is a necessity.

The dog analogy was to support the notion of the positive of the negative. And of course, when one is cheated, it is natural to feel upset. And it isn’t MERELY insecurity. Moreover, you said, “Why would someone whose spouse is cheating on them be insecure?” Is this indicative of mental perturbence? Or were you wasting my time?

My suggestion: review your posts. How many times have you misinterpreted my statements? Including that one other forum, how many times have you jumped to conclusion? Can you convince me with a meticulous argument? That would be great.

Vesica

In reviewing the posts here, we seem to be dancing around a more general idea. Below are some song quotes I think get at it:
However, unless we all had lobotomies as soon as we break up with someone, most of us will have a memory of a not-so-great relationship where deception of some sort was involved...That means we could truly realize what we have in the current one without our spouse being deceptive.

Perhaps third-person experiences would help too....so watching Movies of the Week or reading books could help us 'experience' deception and be able to fully experience the positive??

Keith Russell

Greetings:

What is meant by 'deception'?

I think there is a difference between...say, keeping the details of past relationships 'secret', and outright lying.

Keith.

Gallimore

Interesting point. What's the difference between keeping past relationships "secret" and outright lying?