With one plausible assumption about what (a sort of mutual respect variety of) "love" minimally involves, seemingly any adulterous affair will not instantiate love.
Given that "at time t, a loves b" involves something like "a
respecting the whole person that b is at t", for any three people, x, y,
and z, such that x and y are married at t*:
1. Part of the person that x is at t* is "the spouse of y."
2. If at t* z conducts an adulterous affair with x, then x does not respect x qua the spouse of y.
3. If at t* z does not respect x qua the spouse of y, then z does not respect part of the person that x is.
4. If z does not respect part of the person that x is, then z does not respect the whole person that x is at t*.
5. If z does not respect the whole person that x is at t*, then z does not love x.
6. Suppose that at t* z conducts an adulterous affair with x.
7. Therefore, x does not respect x qua the spouse of y.
8. Therefore, z does not respect the whole person that x is at t*.
9. Therefore, z does not love x.
10. Therefore, if at t* z conducts an adulterous affair with (a married) x, (ipso facto) z does not love x.
~ Matthew J. Bell
~ Matthew J. Bell
No comments:
Post a Comment