In defence of being monogamous

a Valentine's day philosophy special

This Valentine’s day, like never before, monogamy is on the defensive.

Philosopher and Substacker

Harry Chalmers

has been churning out a series of tightly argued essays (“Is Monogamy Morally Permissible?”, “Monogamy Unredeemed”), where he argues that monogamous relationships are immoral and we try to be either single or poly.

Chalmers’ arch-nemesis,

Kyle York

, has been clapping back in print (“Why Monogamy Is Morally Permissible”, “A Couple of Reasons in Favour of Monogamy”), and their academic duel shows no signs of stopping.

Two years ago I hosted these two lovebirds on my channel for a spicy and passionate debate on the ethics of monogamy. At one point they went crazy and just started yelling and swearing and throwing food at each other — shit was wild. Regardless of whether that is true, the debate is a great listen and I recommend it to all who give a flip. (Spotify version here.)

As a 1+1=2 kind of person, I don’t buy that monogamy is wrong. That said, I’ve been putting off sorting through the arguments in detail, so busy am I with the one Valentine I have already.

In what follows, I want to flag a worry I have about the core, foundational claim of Chalmers’s argument — a claim without which Chalmers’ argument fizzles and founders.

Before I voice my foundational worry, I had better tell you the foundational claim I’m worried about, and how it fits into the broader structure of Chalmers’ argument.