Porc Therapy 122: Philosophy Of Dating

Stephanie and Mike talk about whatever issues or questions you have. In this episode:

1) [Question] I have a two-part question pertaining to the rational basis for relationships. The first question is whether you believe romantic interests can and should be subjected to scientific inquiry or reason. The second question, assuming you don’t believe that “love is blind” or that romantic partners should be guided solely by their unchecked whims or emotions, is if you consider it prudent and moral to include one’s earnings and one’s physical composition as two significant factors in evaluating a potential romantic partner.

If it helps you to prepare your thoughts on these two questions I’ll provide some background as to why I’m strongly in the affirmative on both:

Rational Basis for Relationships

If the CEO of a major corporation were asked to explain or justify a recent major acquisition it would be a foregone conclusion that a thorough analysis of relevant facts had been completed and that it was determined that the decision would create value for the company’s shareholders. If the CEO were to offer the sort of fuzzy, instinct-driven responses partners often use to explain their romantic relationships the CEO would surely lose all credibility as someone competent to make important decisions and shareholders would either sell their stock or seek to find a new CEO immediately.

The same analogy could be used in any other area of science or industry where reason and objective reality, though largely unacknowledged and underappreciated, still ultimately dictate the decisions that are made. Yet in romantic relationships, and I’m sure you’d both agree in politics as well, one is considered extremely ‘shallow’ or ‘shrewd’ if one wishes to apply the same intellectual rigor to the decisions and ideals in these fields. People seem very comfortable with the evasive, defeatist notion that these areas of their life are somehow beyond man’s ability to comprehend. For example people will often exaggerate the uniqueness of how they met their partner thus implying that there was some supernatural force at work to bring them together. (Governments also invent miraculous stories to justify their existence)

I believe that refusing to think or to actively deal with reality via one’s own independent judgment is a recipe for disaster in all walks of life – relationships, professionally, politically, etc. When I see the disaster most people make of their romantic personal lives I generally conclude that sadly enough they’re getting what they deserve for ‘playing the lottery’ or relying on hope and prayers rather than science with such a critical aspect of their life. Additionally, and this could be its own discussion topic, I often find that one partner voluntarily takes on a subservient role to the other for a variety of reasons (e.g. financial, religious, etc). The prospect of being dominated or controlled wouldn’t stand in the face of rational inquiry as there are no happy slaves but again, like politics, people generally and especially self-doubting individuals will willingly hand over their lives to another person or group.

Furthermore I would think anyone of self-esteem would be insulted if their partner struggled to explain the root of his attraction and applied no objective evaluation process to conclude that I was ‘good’ in a general sense, not an arbitrary or subjective sense. It seems that the most moral and practical approach to romantic pursuits is a rigorous analysis of the following three questions:

1) What values do I seek in my partner?

2) Why do I seek those values or what makes those values important above others?

3) How do I know that my partner possesses those values?

Objective Criteria: Earnings and Physical Composition

Having concluded that some objective evaluation process should be applied to potential romantic partners, the next logical questions concern the nature of this process – which criteria or variables should be sampled, what is the proper measurement scale for these variables, and how can this test be administered to ensure valid results without imparting undue burden to yourself or the potential partner?

To select the proper variables I’m reminded of Alan Greenspan’s essay Gold and Economic Freedom (1966) in which he identifies the inherent advantages of gold over paper and other potential mediums of exchange and thus explains why, in the absence of government coercion, gold is utilized as a store of objective value and a standard of exchange. For example, gold is relatively scarce, has both functional and artistic value and is thus always in demand, is durable, divisible, homogenous, and portable. The criteria applied in the evaluation of a romantic partner serve the same purpose of money – the facilitation of honest, self-interested trade among parties. And just like gold, there are certain factors such as earnings and physical composition that have inherent advantages over others.

Earnings and physical composition can both be quantified with relative ease, both are significantly within the control of the individual and thus reflective of their actions and underlying values, and both factors have sustainable value in terms of preserving one’s quality of life. There are of course many other factors which would be of interest but many are either already embedded within these two factors or are too difficult to analyze objectively with any great certainty. For example, one’s self-respect, sense of purpose, self-discipline, motivation, integrity, etc are all implied in different ways by earnings and physique. Factors such as one’s personality, sense of humor, long-term aspirations, and a partner’s personal background are all relevant and need not be discarded but they don’t lend themselves to objective evaluation.

I should make it clear that I apply the term ‘earnings’ literally, this should not be confused with ‘income’ or ‘wealth’ alone as both could be obtained but not earned such as via force, fraud, and the charity of others. The dollars a person earns reflects the quantity and value of what the person has produced. Production, whether it be a physical good or the development of an abstract concept, reflects a person’s capacity to think and one’s willingness to do so. One’s earnings speaks volumes of one’s ability to discern the facts of reality and act accordingly, to be guided by reason and self-interest to actively seek out the highest value another is willing to pay via their own efforts and judgment.

One significant complication to the application of earnings as a valid criterion revolves around timing – the current state of one’s earning’s vs. the future state. The potential partner’s current earnings could be dramatically different than their future earnings for many reasons. The potential partner could’ve been recently laid off, or is in the process of starting a business, or is completing a degree or any other relevant step toward boosting one’s future earnings. Likewise, the potential partner may currently enjoy substantial earnings currently but for a variety of reasons, some self-imposed and some not, will fail to earn money in any significant volume in the future. To deal with this issue, one would have to apply the same principles and methodology investors use to evaluate current and future stock prices – a discounted cash flow analysis to incorporate the certainty, risk, and potential of future earnings and to bring all of this to a single net present value. Ultimately, given all the factors and variability errors of valuation are to be expected but not nearly to the point of ruling the exercise pointless.

Two final considerations related to one’s earnings include the structure of the partner’s personal finances and his appreciation for the earnings. A spendthrift who squanders and flaunts his earnings is not of the same character as someone who lives comfortably but invests for the future. Someone senselessly stricken with guilt over their earnings who fawns over the ‘less fortunate’ is not of the same character as someone who fully appreciates the meaning of earnings.

Physique is a sound criterion for the general reasons identified earlier (ease of measure, controllable, sustained value) but especially because it brings to light so many less tangible qualities. Everyone knows that good health is advantageous in so many ways – from reduced health care costs to improved physical performance to simply avoiding the pain and discomfort of illness. Everyone also knows, at least at a general level, the kinds of behaviors that contribute to good or poor health. Some people may be significantly disadvantaged on the criteria of earnings (e.g. sent to bad schools, broken families) but this is much less of an issue with physique as low-cost healthy food abounds as do opportunities to exercise.

Physical composition naturally incorporates and reflects the decisions a person makes every single day – fast food or balanced diet, exercise or no exercise, adequate sleep or insomnia. Sample size is always adequate since a person’s physique can’t be easily built or destroyed in a short period of time but is obtained through consistent patterns of behavior. You can even account for uncontrolled characteristics that contribute to physique such as metabolism. The evaluation could be constructed such that someone with a naturally higher metabolism would have to achieve a lower body fat % than someone with a naturally lower metabolism.

A person who allows themselves to become fat and weak is committing something of a mini-suicide with all the associated symptoms – low self-esteem, erratic behavior (e.g. binge eating), poor motivation, no self-control. Though maybe not actively ending their own life, they’re refusing to take any action to sustain and enhance their life. At any moment, and almost certainly in the near future, this person will be in a position to depend on others. There are surely examples of unhealthy people who exhibit great virtues in many other areas but the conflict seems too great to overlook for something as important as a romantic relationship.

An individual who builds and maintains a sleek, muscular physique expresses a philosophy of life – a proud, self-controlled individual fully capable of inhibiting himself and adopting healthy habits to preserve and enjoy his own life independent of anyone else. A person’s physique largely speaks to how they deeply view themselves and their image of human nature. Just like a person’s earnings, the strong individual will not look to others for their approval but will be proud of his efforts and will use this accomplishment as evidence and fuel to confidently approach other areas of life.

[Disclaimer: take us with a grain of salt!]