Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Ah, if your beliefs are rooted in religion then there's not much we can discuss to find a common agreement, since we're starting from very different axioms.

> I don't believe one's personal happiness is a sufficient measurement to optimize one's life around. (...)I actually think there is plenty of evidence for the truly objective to recognize the danger inherent in maximizing that metric.

I do agree that there are more things to take into account than personal happiness, to guide one's life - I could see for example how someone would sacrifice their life for a better cause for example. I just don't see any moral reason that would apply here, since the act of breaking the vows doesn't harm anyone if both partners are in a position of unhappiness. I do see however how you can see those moral reasons there, since marriage for you it's more than a symbol that you want to commit to the relationship, and it has religious implications.

> I think there are benefits to the spouses, the children, and to society to not only stick it out, but to work on improving it. One of the things that I guess didn't come out clearly in my original comment was that, if you are in the marriage for life, and you are going to honor that commitment, it's a great reason to invest in that marriage and make it as good as it can be.

I partially agree, and to be clear I wouldn't defend the position of not fighting to get the marriage to work. I just think that some of the reasons why marriages no longer work are simply not fixable by putting in effort, and that the belief that there must necessarily be a fix if only you work harder can be dangerous to - people can end up in a position where not only they remain unhappy, but also exhausted from their sacrifices and accumulate feelings of guilt since if the marriage doesn't work is because they haven't done enough.



> Ah, if your beliefs are rooted in religion then there's not much we can discuss to find a common agreement, since we're starting from very different axioms.

IMO, much of the world's arguments are a result of starting from very different axioms. I feel like too often people don't realize those "axioms" or as I would put it, those worldviews, are the real source of the disagreement. The actual disagreements themselves are just a result of approaching life or the particular issue with very different set of foundational beliefs and values.

But finding common agreement is, perhaps, not required or even the most valuable outcome. I believe there is value in simply being able to have those discussions, reasonably...respectfully, even if agreement itself is elusive.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: