How does that distinguish being free to be monogamous and being free to be vegetarian? The number of vegetarians who make binding contracts to be vegetarian is essentially nonexistent.
You didn’t answer the question. You answered the question “why can’t you make a contract for monogamy?” and my question was “why does the inability to make a contract for monogamy matter?” Nobody, for all practical purposes, makes a contract to be vegetarian, so whether or not you can make a contract is irrelevant to comparing the two.
Does at-will employment mean people in the US aren’t free to hire each other?
Long term contracts exist and are enforceable (even if they’re not the default). Monogamy contracts aren’t enforceable in the current legal regime.
Only if you’re dynamically consistent (no akrasia, etc.), otherwise your future self is another party—and some people do write contracts with their future selves; does the fact that the police won’t enforce such contracts mean people aren’t free to make them?
With vegetarianism itself, people do seem to stick to it (but probably there’s some selection bias at work here), but with restrictive diets in general, I’m under the impression that the fraction of people who try to be on a diet but then lapse is within an order of magnitude of the fraction of couples who try to be monogamous but then lapse—probably within a factor of two, too.
How does that distinguish being free to be monogamous and being free to be vegetarian? The number of vegetarians who make binding contracts to be vegetarian is essentially nonexistent.
Monogamy involves another party, vegetarianism doesn’t.
You didn’t answer the question. You answered the question “why can’t you make a contract for monogamy?” and my question was “why does the inability to make a contract for monogamy matter?” Nobody, for all practical purposes, makes a contract to be vegetarian, so whether or not you can make a contract is irrelevant to comparing the two.
Like I said in the parent, vegetarianism doesn’t require a contract, monogamy does.
But why does that matter?
So does employment. Does at-will employment mean people in the US aren’t free to hire each other?
Only if you’re dynamically consistent (no akrasia, etc.), otherwise your future self is another party—and some people do write contracts with their future selves; does the fact that the police won’t enforce such contracts mean people aren’t free to make them?
Long term contracts exist and are enforceable (even if they’re not the default). Monogamy contracts aren’t enforceable in the current legal regime.
There is a huge difference in degree here.
With vegetarianism itself, people do seem to stick to it (but probably there’s some selection bias at work here), but with restrictive diets in general, I’m under the impression that the fraction of people who try to be on a diet but then lapse is within an order of magnitude of the fraction of couples who try to be monogamous but then lapse—probably within a factor of two, too.
I was talking about the difference in degree between cooperating with your future self and cooperating with others.
The former’s harder for me; YMMV.