Cheating outside of marriage is not immoral

There is no obvious reason why cheating (in a relationship) goes against any moral principle. An exception would be a religious system of morality which includes the concept of marriage being a sacred contract.

This is not to say that I am saying I would cheat, however the reasons I would choose not to cheat have nothing to do with the idea of it being 'bad'.

Feel free to give reasons if you disagree.

In my view if you agree to be in a monogamous relationship with somebody, then you are promising not to cheat on them while the relationship exists between you. So cheating is a significant violation of trust; it can also have significant effects on the person being cheated on (making them feel like they're not good enough for you, making it harder for them to trust other people in the future, etc.). So cheating is morally wrong because it is a form of dishonesty, and because it causes unnecessary suffering/difficulty for another person.

Of course, if you've agreed to be in an open or polyamorous relationship it's a different story - in that situation I wouldn't refer to it as cheating.

Reply 3

dock-leaf

I would say this is a flawed post - think not in 'moral principle' - linguistic human abstraction, to classify - but in human feeling. The moral value and reasoning lies not in the cold conceptual realm of scholarship - but from its essence; human feeling. If you are aware that this would emotionally hurt your companion of suggested love; then there may be value in a negative moral judgement. If this can be verified in your own feelings - it would hurt you if they were to do so - then cast your academic 'moral principle' aside - which ironically - is there purely due to human Feeling - and know that this is most just cause to assert moral ambiguity.

Reply 4

PharaohFromSpace

Original post by xylas

Don't understand what you mean by a religious system of morality. Morals are morals and right is right and wrong is wrong.

If you're in a relationship, then there is probably the mutual understanding that you're together, else what's the point of calling it a "relationship", if you feel that way hire someone instead, they won't care.

Spoiler

Reply 5

xylas

Original post by Mostly_Crazy

In my view if you agree to be in a monogamous relationship with somebody, then you are promising not to cheat on them while the relationship exists between you...

Original post by PharaohFromSpace

Don't understand what you mean by a religious system of morality. Morals are morals and right is right and wrong is wrong...

A religious system of morality is what it says on the tin: the idea that certain things are right or wrong because God made them so.

Being 'together' does not mean cheating is wrong. Please elaborate on that view.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 6

PharaohFromSpace

Original post by xylas

I don't see dishonesty = morally wrong. Can you explain why you think that is the case? Also there are many many things that cause 'suffering/difficulty for another person' which are not considered to be immoral.

A religious system of morality is what it says on the tin: the idea that certain things are right or wrong because God made them so.

Being 'together' does not mean cheating is wrong. Please elaborate on that view.

Thanks for the definition.

Also I'm starting to think you're a troll.

Assuming you're not, I already did elaborate, the second part of my answer, the whole whole mutual understanding thing.

Reply 7

hezzlington

Original post by xylas

So why is adultery considered reasonable grounds for divorce?

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 8

xylas

Original post by PharaohFromSpace

Thanks for the definition...

'Mutual understanding that you're together' does not mean cheating is wrong. If you don't want to elaborate that's fine.

Original post by hezzlington

So why is adultery considered reasonable grounds for divorce?

Read the OP, I made an exception for marriage.

Reply 9

Mostly_Crazy

Original post by xylas

I don't see dishonesty = morally wrong. Can you explain why you think that is the case?

Well to start with let's point out that morals are subjective - they vary over time, across cultures, and even between individuals. If we disagree fundamentally on what is right and wrong, then we're unlikely to agree on much else here.

I believe dishonesty is morally wrong because of the potential it has to cause damage. It's possible to make the argument that some small lies are "good"; for instance, telling somebody you liked the food they cooked even if you didn't. I'd consider these to be morally ambiguous, because whether they are right or wrong depends on whether you value short term happiness and fulfilment over possible benefits in the long run. But any kind of larger deception, I believe to always be morally wrong. Being lied to in a significant way, especially in a way which undermines the "rules" (even if the rules are informal) of a relationship, can cause a lot of negative emotions, and could lead to difficulties in future relationships. So cheating (and more generally, dishonesty) is therefore knowingly causing harm to another person, which I consider to be immoral by definition.

Original post by xylas

Also there are many many things that cause 'suffering/difficulty for another person' which are not considered to be immoral.

Could you elaborate on this, perhaps with examples? I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but I suspect we may disagree.

Reply 10

hezzlington

Original post by xylas

'Mutual understanding that you're together' does not mean cheating is wrong. If you don't want to elaborate that's fine.

Read the OP, I made an exception for marriage.

I thought so, I got a bit confused though. Apologies

Reply 11

xylas

Original post by Mostly_Crazy

Well to start with let's point out that morals are subjective...

Could you elaborate on this, perhaps with examples? I'm not entirely sure what you mean, but I suspect we may disagree.

Agreed that morals are subjective. Anyway so now you are saying that cheating is knowingly causing harm. Do you consider negative emotions to be harm? I don't. People make others unhappy all the time, maybe not as their intention. Emotions are not always based on solid grounds anyway so this is a very tenuous reason imo.

With regard to causing suffering/difficulty, there are many examples. The prison guard that doesn't give the inmate food on time, the teacher who puts the child in detention, the friend who crashes your car, the construction worker who causes a massive delay on the motorway... None of these are intending to cause suffering but they know they will regardless.

Original post by dock-leaf

I would say this is a flawed post - think not in 'moral principle' - linguistic human abstraction, to classify - but in human feeling...

You can't just call a post 'flawed' and proceed to say "academic moral principles are based purely on feelings" without giving any reasons for such a statement.

Original post by hezzlington

I thought so, I got a bit confused though. Apologies