Examining and Criticizing the Argument that Marriage is Immoral: Love as the Sustainer of Marriage

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

Islamic Sciences and Culture Academy

Abstract

Marriage is a lasting and dynamic institution that has played a significant and undeniable role in the development and evolution of human societies. History reveals a wide variety of patterns of marriage in different eras. Historical debates and developments in marriage pave the way for differences in the approaches of moral philosophers to the issue of marriage. In modern times, some philosophers have presented various arguments against the morality of marriage. Dan Moller considers marriage as conditional on love and believes that couples who promise to love each other promise something beyond human will. After explaining the different ways in which a marriage contract is made, he argues that none of the marriage contracts are permanent and that most of them fail and end in divorce, and that marriage is therefore immoral and wrong. In this paper, Moller’ argument is critically reviewed by rational analysis. There are several drawbacks to Moller’s argument, including; voluntary nature of the expression of emotions, ignoring the value of happy days of married people, the non-necessity of love for marriage in different periods and the nativity of the argument. This article also provides a definition of love based on moral virtues. Accordingly, love is in fact love of excellences and virtues, and it disappears when the loved one loses his excellences and virtues. As a result, the continuation of love depends on the couples strengthening their virtues and perfections. So marriage is conditioned on the growth of moral virtues and mutual respect of couples.

Keywords

References

  1. ارسطو (1349)، سیاست، ترجمۀ حمید عنایت، تهران: انتشارات نیل.
  2. اسلامی اردکانی، حسین (1392)، «ازدواج به مثابه اقدامی اخلاقی؛ پاسخ به سه استدلال»، مجلۀ اخلاق، سال سوم، شمارۀ 10، ص 9-36.
  3. افلاطون (1353)، جمهوری، ترجمۀ رضا کاویانی و محمدحسن لطفی، تهران: انتشارات کتابخانۀ ابن‌سینا.
  4. بستان، حسین (1393)، خانواده در اسلام، قم: پژوهشگاه حوزه و دانشگاه.
  5. محبوبی‌منش، حسین (1383)، تغییرات اجتماعی ازدواج، تهران: مطالعات راهبردی زنان.
  6. ملکیان، مصطفی (1392)، نظر تکمیل شدۀ مصطفی ملکیان دربارۀ ازدواج (گفتگو با مصطفی ملکیان)، صدانت، تیر ماه 1392، https://b2n.ir/u92143
  7. Brake, E. (2011), Minimizing marriage: Marriage, morality, and the law, Oxford University Press.
  8. Brake, E. (2016), Marriage and Domestic Partnership. In The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Edward N. Zalta (ed.), https://b2n.ir/b38209.
  9. Coontz, S. (2006), Marriage: a History, London: Penguin.
  10. Halwani, R. (2018), Philosophy of love, sex, and marriage: an introduction‏, New York and London: Routledge.
  11. Hegel, G. W. (1995), Elements of the Philosophy of Right. Cambridge: Ed. Allen W. Wood. Trans. H. B. Nisbet. Cambridge University Press.
  12. Landau, I. (2004), “An argument for marriage”, Philosophy, Vol. 79, No. 309, pp. 475-48.
  13. Martin, M. W. (1993), “Love's constancy”, Philosophy, Vol 68, Issue 263, 63-77.
  14. Mendus, Susan (1984), “Marital Faithfulness”, Philosophy, Vol. 59, No. 228, 243-252.
  15. Moller, D. (2003), “An argument against marriage”, Philosophy, Vol. 78, No. 303, pp. 79-91.
  16. Nichols, J. A. (2011), Misunderstanding Marriage and Missing Religion, Mich. St. L. Rev.
  17. Ponzetti, J. J. (2003), International encyclopedia of marriage and family, Macmillan Reference USA.
  18. Wasserstrom, R. (1974), “Is Adultery Immoral?” Philosophical Forum, Vol 5, 513–528.
  19. Wilson, J. (1989), “Can One Promise to Love Another?” Philosophy, Vol 64, pp. 557–63.
New Intellectual Research
Volume 6, Issue 12
March 2022
Pages 171-190

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics