Additional Questions on the Question of Chastity

Part of an ongoing conversation. Dr. Rolf Andreassen, with whom we have been discussing the morality (or otherwise) of monogamy, makes the following comment. My questions below refer to this and also to previous comments by the good doctor. I solicit answers not just from him, but from any reader who cares to comment.

As for sex, I haven’t said it’s relative at all; I have merely said that I wish to draw the line in a different place from Mr Wright’s lifelong monogamy. The actual rule may still be absolute. However, since I do not have full knowledge of the morality, I’m much more inclined to let consenting adults work out their own damnation than I am when children, who cannot meaningfully consent, are involved.

You define two categories of moral behavior. The first category is known moral absolutes, such as the rule against child abuse. The second category includes those things where your lack of full knowledge inclines you to defer to the opinion of the individual involved. You imply that the lack of informed consent on the part of the child is one significant consideration.

If I have not misunderstood your position, the rule against child abuse is an absolute in your philosophy, but the rule against unchastity is a matter of opinion where reasonable men can differ.

Read the rest of this entry »

Originally published at John C. Wright's Journal. Please leave any comments there.