Polyamorous and non-monogamous relationships are widespread

The argument

In his work, George Peter Murdock found that 195 societies in his sample were non-monogamous, while only 43 were comprised of monogamous couples. Therefore, his sociological construct of the family needed to reflect the prominence of polyamory. In defining the family unit as a shared residence, economic cooperation, and reproduction, he was able to accommodate non-monogamous relationships where multiple sexual partners lived under the same roof and took part in domestic responsibilities.

Context

Any sociological definition of a family must be able to accommodate the ubiquity of non-monogamous relationships across cultures.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Critics reply that Murdock's cross-cultural data establishes only that monogamy is not universal — not that his particular 'shared residence, economic cooperation, reproduction' definition is correct. The prevalence of non-monogamy is evidence about marriage forms, not a validation of these three criteria. They add that the definition's inclusion of reproduction excludes childless couples, adoptive families and same-sex families widely recognised as families, and that it centres a dated functionalist model. Modern sociology increasingly defines family by relationships and function — 'what families do' — rather than a fixed checklist of residence, economy and reproduction, so Murdock's construct is contested.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] Murdock's sample showing many non-monogamous societies establishes that monogamy isn't universal, not that his residence-economy-reproduction definition is correct. [Rejecting P2] Including 'reproduction' excludes childless, adoptive and same-sex families widely recognised as families, so the definition fails to capture arrangements it should. [Rejecting P3] Modern sociology increasingly defines family by relationships and function ('what families do') rather than a fixed checklist, so Murdock's criteria are dated and contested.