You're looking at Less Wrong's discussion board. This includes all posts, including those that haven't been promoted to the front page yet. For more information, see About Less Wrong.

drethelin comments on More "Stupid" Questions - Less Wrong Discussion

14 Post author: NancyLebovitz 31 July 2013 09:18AM

You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.

Comments (495)

You are viewing a single comment's thread. Show more comments above.

Comment author: drethelin 31 July 2013 08:17:43PM 17 points [-]

I think it's the influence of San Francisco

More seriously: I think it follows perfectly well from rationality which is at it's core about doing non obvious things that result in better outcomes once you do the math. Obviously it comes down to preferences but many people seem to prefer multiple partners and only refrain because society condemns it. Polyamkry is more honest than cheating and more preference satisfying than monogamy for those with poly amorous inclinations.

Plus there's all the conveniences.

Comment author: Ben_LandauTaylor 01 August 2013 03:45:12PM 8 points [-]

Nitpicky tangent:

rationality which is at it's core about doing non obvious things that result in better outcomes once you do the math

Don't neglect the obvious things that result in better outcomes.

Comment author: [deleted] 02 August 2013 11:14:47AM 1 point [-]

You're either already doing those or they're not actually obvious.

Comment author: Error 03 August 2013 03:55:27AM 3 points [-]

Objection! They might be obvious, and you're failing to do them out of akrasia or similar.

Not that that's ever happened to me. <twitch>

Comment author: Eliezer_Yudkowsky 01 August 2013 04:23:36AM 8 points [-]

I think it's the influence of San Francisco

Historical note: Started in OBNYC and spread to the Bay.

Comment author: drethelin 31 July 2013 08:30:54PM 7 points [-]

More specific benefits: you can get sex more often with less scheduling disruptions

You can have mutually fulfilling partial relationships that would not be sustainable if they had to be monogamous. Eg: someone can get most of their affection from you but indulge their foot fetish with someone else. Or if you simply have a different sex drive than your partner.

More widespread emotional support network. If you're prone to loneliness, having more people you can connect with will help you not lean all your metaphorical weight on one person

Less inhibition: depending on the rules of your polyamory you no longer have to kill your own urges when seeing someone attractive to you. This may be a downside if you want to get work done.

If one or more of you is bi you get to talk about people you find hot and seducing them to your bed. This is lots of fun.

Less stress: the converse of 3, you don't have to b the entire emotional support for another person.

Comment author: NancyLebovitz 01 August 2013 11:22:12AM 2 points [-]

If a polyamorous group is sharing a household, there are more skills and there's more likely to be someone who doesn't hate a particular chore.

Comment author: drethelin 01 August 2013 01:50:10PM 2 points [-]

And the somewhat different claim: sharing a household with people is good for that and other reasons and polyamory can make that go more smoothly