Is Infidelity in Emotional and Marital Relationships Unethical?

What is infidelity in marriage and when does it occur? Can one honestly love two or more people simultaneously without being unfaithful? If a person can hide an extramarital or non-committed relationship, are they still unfaithful? Is infidelity considered ethical or unethical from an individual and social perspective? Hossein Ghazian, a sociologist, and Arash Naraghi, a philosophy professor at Moravian University, address these questions in this week's taboo discussion. Mr. Naraghi, if you allow, we will start the discussion with you and the question of whether infidelity in marital and romantic relationships is a concept within the framework of individual ethics or a socially constructed concept? Arash Naraghi: You see, we do not have any moral issue or value that is purely individual. After all, moral issues are always a reflection of social values and judgments. Therefore, from certain angles, although infidelity may be perceived as an issue between two or more individuals, the judgment you carry in these individual relationships certainly has significant social aspects. Let me give you an example. For instance, if I lie to you; well, that is something between you and me, but part of why lying is considered morally wrong relates to social aspects. One of the reasons we condemn lying in interpersonal relationships is that if this behavior becomes generalized, it will disrupt social trust, and then social order will be disturbed. Therefore, this aspect of why lying is considered bad in interpersonal relationships relates to the social considerations we have for the common good. You raised a point that was precisely my question. Is this valuation and conceptualization of infidelity dictated from outside this relationship and taught and institutionalized in them, or is it an issue that each individual can decide on? Perhaps Mr. Ghazian, you would like to explain this matter. Hossein Ghazian: Well, if we want to look at the subject from a general perspective, ethics and moral concepts are born, grow, and evolve within a social environment. Therefore, in this sense, ethics falls within the realm of social matters and is not something non-social, and when they become social, we naturally learn them through socialization. For example, we learn that infidelity is wrong without necessarily questioning whether it is or not. We learn these things until we reach a level of social maturity, a critical maturity, where we can evaluate what society has previously given us and see whether we can accept them or not. But in this sense, infidelity, like any other phenomenon or moral judgment, is social. Well, Mr. Naraghi, Mr. Ghazian said that we may reach a level of thought and consciousness where we want to question these matters. If we want to question them, is infidelity morally rejected and wrong? Naraghi: Infidelity, in my view, makes sense when deep emotional relationships have formed between individuals based on a type of covenant or commitment. Sometimes the terms of this commitment and covenant are explicitly stated in a contract like a marriage contract; sometimes, they are implicit, meaning they are not stated but the parties assume they have a mutual understanding regarding the terms of this covenant. Therefore, whenever we have a relationship based on a mutual covenant and commitment, then the meaning of infidelity can be understood. That is, infidelity becomes meaningful in this context. Infidelity is when one party in this relationship violates the terms of this contract to the detriment of the other without their knowledge and consent. In this specific sense, I believe infidelity is unethical. The general rule is that it is unethical. Infidelity ultimately results in harm and damage to the other, and we often consider harm to another in the moral domain as wrong. The reason for this is that in these types of human relationships, individuals become extremely vulnerable. You lower the defensive barriers of your soul, and as a result, you become much more defenseless against the arrows that your emotional partner directs at you, thus making you more vulnerable. A third reason that makes infidelity in emotional relationships unethical is that it often involves lying; that is, a person, in order to hide their infidelity from their emotional partner, either gives them false information, which we call active lying, or conceals correct and necessary information from them, which we call passive lying. Mr. Ghazian, Mr. Naraghi spoke about a covenant that even exists in an unspoken form between two individuals or is assumed to exist, and they believe that even if someone betrays this covenant, an unethical act has occurred. My question here would be how much can assumptions align with realities? If someone has not declared their commitment in a relationship, why should the assumptions of the other party be subject to ethical consideration? Ghazian: Commitment is the subject of human voluntary action, and anything that is not the subject of human voluntary action does not fall under the concept of infidelity. For example, consider falling in love with and becoming attached to another person. This subject is not the subject of our voluntary action. We unconsciously and unexpectedly become attached to another. Therefore, attachment to another cannot be considered infidelity because it is not the subject of our voluntary action. However, if we have become attached to someone and this attachment is not within our control, it does not satisfy our emotional partner that we have not been unfaithful. The reason is that relationships are shaped within a culture, follow cultural patterns, and adhere to the expectations and roles that exist within that institution. Sometimes we may not be aware of these patterns. One of the things that this relational institution in contemporary societies brings with it is that when we enter a relationship, it seems that it is monogamous or should be. Thus, we see that although conceptually we cannot portray entering a new relationship as infidelity, socially we practically consider this act deserving of blame and sometimes even punishment. Mr. Naraghi, but what problems can this infidelity cause? Because infidelity, in the concept that exists in people's minds, mainly occurs when a sexual relationship is established. Why is sexual relations so important and determining in this context, and perhaps for many people, it is the case that until this happens, nothing unforgivable has occurred? What do you think the reason for this is? Naraghi: First of all, I am not sure that infidelity is limited to sexual acts. What we consider infidelity is when a person, contrary to the mutual commitment they have with their sexual partner, secretly and without their partner's consent violates those terms. Sometimes this is in a sexual act, and sometimes it is in establishing deep emotional relationships with another. For example, suppose someone goes on a trip with someone else without informing their emotional partner. However, it is also clear that sexual acts evoke greater sensitivity because sexual relationships are often considered a sign of a deep level of relationships and emotional attachments. Therefore, in many cases, when you love someone, you want their body and soul together, and you consider yourself physically and spiritually belonging to the other. This very deep relationship you establish with another's body is an important part of forming an emotional relationship. It is natural that this evokes greater sensitivity. However, I would also like to add that there is a stereotype in society that believes that sexual acts carry less emotional burden for men than for women. This is why, in the context of a patriarchal society, male infidelity is considered natural or unimportant, while female infidelity is viewed as unnatural or very significant and deserving of punishment. Therefore, to create balance, you must tell society that it is not the case that men have a blank check to downplay their infidelity, and alongside that, we must also explain that female infidelity is not as bad as society portrays it. Mr. Ghazian, Mr. Naraghi mentioned that it is natural that greater sensitivity is evoked when one side of an emotional relationship shares their body with someone else. What do you think? Is this natural, and if it is considered natural, why is this the case, and why is the sensitivity around sharing one's body outside the relationship so much stronger than other issues? Ghazian: Let’s start from here and examine some of the judgments Dr. Naraghi made. Because we must see in which society we are speaking. In one society, women may commit infidelity more, and in another society, men; for example, in American society, research has shown that women and men cheat on each other almost equally. Moreover, the stereotype referred to is not that men do not consider sexual matters emotionally significant, but that women do. There is much research showing that women and men think this way. Women generally believe that sexual relationships entail or at least precede an emotional relationship, while men do not think this way and consider it simpler and more superficial. The stereotype lies in the fact that we place moral judgments on these realities. However, regarding the importance of sexual infidelity, it may not actually be so. Because you know, modern romantic relationships are at least a blend of emotional, physical, sexual, communicative, and supportive relationships. Now the question is, for example, regarding the violation of the unity of emotional communication, such as chatting, exchanging romantic emails, reciting poetry for a beloved, going out with them, hugging and kissing them, or establishing sexual relations... which of these might be considered infidelity? Almost all of these are now more or less subjects of infidelity for many individuals, but at the same time, I agree with you that still, it seems that sexual relationships carry significant importance, infidelity in them is condemned, but in practice, it also occurs to a large extent; for example, in American society, nearly three-quarters of couples have cheated on each other sexually at least once. Becoming attached to another is not a plan or scheme we have in advance. It is like an accident, like an incident. We do not try to make this happen. It is enough to reach the street, and when we are in the street, we may be exposed to an accident, and we may have an accident today or another day. It is not our voluntary action. Mr. Naraghi, do you think it is possible to be in simultaneous relationships and not be unfaithful? Is there a way for this? Naraghi: Yes, it is certainly possible. You see, the principle that you become attached to several people, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, is not infidelity. Infidelity is when you enter these relationships contrary to the explicit or implicit commitment between you and your emotional partner and without their knowledge and consent. Otherwise, it is entirely possible that you condition your relationship with your emotional partner from the beginning regarding the type of relationship you want to establish with them and, so to speak, keep the relationship open. That is, you say that you want to have emotional relationships with several people simultaneously and give your emotional partner the opportunity to decide whether they want to be in such a relationship or not. I somewhat disagree with Mr. Ghazian's assertion that involuntary actions do not fall under moral judgment. I may unintentionally become attached to another, and in this regard, you may not be able to blame me, but for not being careful enough to avoid being in such experiences, you may consider me deserving of blame. You see, even if someone has become involved in an emotional relationship without their choice and will, as soon as they hide this relationship from their emotional partner and create a facade as if nothing has happened and the terms of the contract have not been violated, this will be an instance of infidelity. You do not have the right to decide about the fate of this relationship on behalf of your emotional partner simply because you have become involved in an emotional relationship involuntarily. Here we arrive at the point related to hiding such an emotional relationship. When is infidelity considered infidelity? If you cheat and your partner never finds out about this infidelity, have you still cheated? Is this concealment and deception itself unethical, or is it something that perhaps one side of the relationship wants to say in order not to cause pain to the other party, who, as we discussed, has involuntarily fallen in love with someone else but does not want to cause suffering to their current partner and hides this from them? Mr. Ghazian, what is the ethical challenge in this situation? Ghazian: Let’s assume that both parties in an emotional relationship prioritize pleasure and happiness over truth. Here, by my concealment, I may reveal a truth that could cause pain to the other party, and this can lead to ethical dilemmas.