"Hipocrits"? Are typo's hilarious? A 3.75 GPA is wasted on some people. I wonder who he paid to write his papers.
What Constitutes Cheating?
- Thread starter Jade Glow
- Start date
Actually I fully comprehend your theory. But it is just that. It is your theory. I will patiently wait for good science on the issue.
We also now know that there is plenty of scientific evidence that runs contra your theory.
You are just not a reliable source.
Yes, but he is one - therefore you have a reading comprehension problem because you said he denied it.
Perhaps then you can start out by retracting your erroneous claims up thread. For example, post #38 is erroneous as is post #35. The errors in those posts indicate that you failed at understanding what I wrote, therefore invalidating your previous post as it must have been based on a misunderstanding.
Now you're simply saying the jury is out on whether I'm right, which is a different claim than you earlier put forward, and fine by me.
In any case I re-iterate my view that those who view cheating as immoral fall into one of two categories: People who are denying their own humanity, and people who are lying to themselves and/or others about it.
Apparently not my android phone which is responsible for all sorts of amusing spellings. Perhaps we can start a thread on why "swype" sucks. Are you going to contribute anything of substance on this thread? Or fall back on your chicken-shit strategy of piling on with irrelevant criticisms?
Actually I would suggest the problem was your unclear writing:
It appeared that you were denying both being classless and a hypocrite.
It now appears that you have clarified it to just denying being classless.
You may hold whatever view you like. It is your theory, enjoy it. But it ain't accepted science. There is no objective basis to declare cheating as a essential part of being human.
Exactly!!!! If you cannot tell your partner what you are doing because you know it will upset them then you are cheating.WE WERE ON A BREAK ! ! !
The OP ask what constitutes cheating to us, not to our partners.
To me, if you do something you don't want your partner to know about with someone else, it's cheating.
But different people have different views of what is cheating , so whoever has the stricter rules on cheating will always be the one who decides what is or isn't cheating, it only takes one person to end a relationship.
Say Wha? In which post?
That should be easy, since I've only had two in this thread. I'd quote them, but some members might think quoting oneself is an indication of vanity.
I think you're misreading my post. I'm not questioning his being one or not, but rather his mistyping a word that he used almost weekly. He'll blame it on his secretary, intern, equipment or something like that.
Mind you if I were to put my Freudian slippers on I get a picture of a hip(p)o, possibly a house hip(p)o and wonder what it would look like in a samurai mask.
Fuji, at least you are consistent. What amuses me about your position is that you have adopted a fairly pedestrian jusitification for your immoral and hurtful (to your S.O.) actions and yet still claim the moral high ground. That's really quite amazing.
There is nothing new about the claim that some external force "compels" you to do something that personally benefits you but that the society in which you live condemns. What's really special about your justification is that you condemn everyone who does not adopt your transparent excuses as somehow living "inferior lives" and/or being hypocritical. I presume that you have to take this position just so you can reassure yourself that you have the right to be morally outraged by some of the other comments on this board ...
I'm curious ... do you believe your persistent cheating on your S.O. is moral? Yes or no? If it's moral, then why not tell her? If it's immoral, then your claim that "natural selection" or other evolutionary forces compel you to cheat is just an excuse you repeat so you won't have to take any responsibility for your actions.
It's my opinion, on record on terb on another thread (somewhat infamously) that done properly cheating is practically by definition high class behavior. Thus I was categorically denying HOF's slur in that I hold the opposite position with regard to the relationship between cheating and class.
So you're cheating if you tell her she looks great instead of confessing that she's turning into a fat cow ?
If you really love her - you will lie rather than hurt her with the truth..... about anything.
I think cheating is return visits, a slip up is a one time visit. )Just a working theory at this point.)
It needs a little work but does make a point.
A long time relationship conundrum has been when you SO says, does this dress make me look too big, how do you answer? Luckily I don't remember having been put in that position.
Can you clarify in what way cheating is immoral? Further, since you seem to know, can you tell me in what way my wife has been hurt? So far as I know she hasn't been. You appear to have inside information?
Of course the reason why she has not been hurt is because I have enough class not to get caught. Successful cheating does require a person to function on a higher level, with greater skill and intellect, than average. Those who get caught generally get caught because they lack class, or because they are stupid. Certainly it's also possible to be unlucky, but generally I don't believe that--I generally believe those who get caught cheating are caught because they aren't skilled, intelligent, or socialized enough to play the game correctly.
In short, it's a straight forward sexual competition and some people lose it. No, it's not fair.
Certainly there is no external force. It's an internal force, my own will, a fundamental expression of my being. In expressing it, rather than denying it, I'm functioning at a higher and more successful level than those who are unable to do so.
Our society simultaneously condemns and glorifies it. We're all fundamentally hypocritical in this regard, and our society reflects that hypocrisy very well.
More accurately it's not immoral. Depending on your conception of morality that makes it moral, or amoral. There's no moral duty to cheat, only a biological human imperative to do so, and there is nothing immoral about being fundamentally human. Rather I take a Nietzchean view on this particular point (but not on all points) that moralities that condemn cheating are unhealthy, and a type of anti-human sickness.
Because telling her would plainly be immoral.
That used to be true, but have you kept up in the field. For instance have you had a chance to read "Almost Chimpanzee"?
There is also so very cogent articles in the last couple of years in "Nature." The area really is unsettled, to say the least.
Especially now that we can say with some certainty that natural selection (one evolutionary mechanism of several) is more of a gatekeeper than a change producer.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080908185238.htm
Probability of cheating self reported at 40% in different studies, but that's almost certainly an under-statement because many won't admit to it, even in an anonymous survey. It's therefore probable that well over half, perhaps three quarters, of people cheat on their partners.
What's your definition of normal? Something that well over half the population does would seem to qualify.
Sure there's going to be a debate in the literature on the subject of why people cheat, whether it's evolution, whether it's culture. The argument for evolution is pretty strong, "Almost Chimpanzee" notwithstanding. You might notice that it's also been found (in 2010, more recently than AC) to be an evolutionary stable strategy.
What's generally been challenged is not that there is an evolutionary basis for infidelity, but rather whether it's cultural (meme) or genetic (gene) and whether there's a genetic basis for sex differences in infidelity. Some people claim that men and women react to infidelity differently, the claim for example that women care more than men do about "emotional" cheating as opposed to physical, sexual cheating. That difference has been disputed as a cultural effect. Few, however, dispute the advantages (to men or to women) of successful cheating as an evolutionary strategy.
Follow on questions like whether jealousy has a biological basis or whether it's cultural (a meme) are also debate.
However, it doesn't matter to my argument whether it's hard wired into us through biological evolution (genes) or through cultural evolution (memes). Either way it's who we are.
Probability of cheating self reported at 40% in different studies, but that's almost certainly an under-statement because many won't admit to it, even in an anonymous survey. It's therefore probable that well over half, perhaps three quarters, of people cheat on their partners.
What's your definition of normal? Something that well over half the population does would seem to qualify.
Sure there's going to be a debate in the literature on the subject of why people cheat, whether it's evolution, whether it's culture. The argument for evolution is pretty strong, "Almost Chimpanzee" notwithstanding. You might notice that it's also been found (in 2010, more recently than AC) to be an evolutionary stable strategy.
What's generally been challenged is not that there is an evolutionary basis for infidelity, but rather whether it's cultural (meme) or genetic (gene) and whether there's a genetic basis for sex differences in infidelity. Some people claim that men and women react to infidelity differently, the claim for example that women care more than men do about "emotional" cheating as opposed to physical, sexual cheating. That difference has been disputed as a cultural effect. Few, however, dispute the advantages (to men or to women) of successful cheating as an evolutionary strategy.
Follow on questions like whether jealousy has a biological basis or whether it's cultural (a meme) are also debate.
However, it doesn't matter to my argument whether it's hard wired into us through biological evolution (genes) or through cultural evolution (memes). Either way it's who we are.
It is not "who were are" it is "what we are doing right now."
The studies you show are a very small group of (presumably) Canadians. It is not cross-cultural or even widespread. More importantly it is a snapshot of time. It doesn't show that the trait is longstanding or advantageous, or if it is controlled by natural selection or any other evolutionary factor.
AC is a peice of the puzzle, but a proper scientific piece. They looked at certain biological traits that were suggested by some who talk about the evolution of sexual reproduction to suggest just what you suggest. And when proper scientific experimentation was done the presumptions turned out not to be so.
Kin selection or preference is another important part of evolutionary psychology and a huge hole was ripped in that theory in a recent article in Nature which showed statistically that if offered no explanation for behaviour of any scientific value.
Radical adaptionists have got their process backwards and keep trying to force the data to fit. They see an item and say because it can do X or Y, or might offer X or Y advantage that it must have evolved to do so. Then they leave the proper scientists to come in, do the hard work, and quite often prove them wrong.
It is like some people who show up at a multi-car crash and evolve a theory on how the crash happened without taking measurements or doing calculations and reconstructions. If it is obvious it might be right, but if not...it falls apart.
Right now, there is no scientific consensus on sexual reproduction and mate selection as they fit within evolutionary theory. And I just don't think you are authoritative enough to end that ongoing inquiry.
Thanks for sharing your view, Adrienne.Personally, I do not believe in sexual monogamy. If my future SO (yes, still single boys!) feels the need to explore, that is completely acceptable if done safely and respectfully towards me (i.e wrap it up and not in my bed). What would be unacceptable is if it negatively affects me and our relationship (i.e spending less time time together or if his hobbying is dipping into my shoe fund).
My future SO could sure as hell expect me to engage with other partners from time to time, with either men or women.
One of you who is probably reading this... said to me "after so many years of having chicken, sometimes you just want steak"
And I completely agree with this.
I wonder if it makes a difference to you if he's secretive about seeing someone else, or is that still fine as long as you aren't neglected?
