h3h.net

In his Philosophy of Right, Hegel outlines the Family and its essential component: Marriage.

Furthermore, since marriage arises out of the free surrender by both sexes of their personalities, which are infinitely unique to themselves, it must not be concluded within the naturally identical circle of people who are acquainted and familiar with each other in every detail – a circle in which the individuals do not have a distinct personality of their own in relation to one another – but must take place from separate families and personalities of different origin.

I agree completely with this notion that a marriage is best composed of two people with complementary personalities. It matters not what qualities the two share while apart, but what they share together.

…for what is to be united must first be separate; the power of procreation, like that of the spirit, increases with the magnitude of oppositions out of which it reconstitutes itself. Familiarity, acquaintance, and the habit of shared activity should not be present before marriage; they should be discovered only within it, and the value of this discovery is all the greater the richer it is and the more components it has.

Here is where I lose him a bit. I agree that married couples should form a basis on shared experiences, thus strengthening the marriage, but I also think that there is a fair amount of “courting” necessary to ensure the compatibility of the couple. Mind you, I in no way mean the “courting” of the twentieth century. :)

Hegel says that love, although an essential part of marriage, can’t be the whole. He claims that there must be a higher demand toward which both people must strive and respect. This demand, for Hegel, is the obligation of non-dissolution – that is, being obligated to work and live together, not letting the marriage dissolve (”for better or for worse”).

I agree that love can’t be the only thing and that there must be a common desire to live through the worst together. I’m not so sure about placing this obligation higher than love, however, because it is love that will be the most effective in the most difficult times. Love is manifested in concrete form via the bearing and raising of children, as they are the combination of the parents’ love and devotion.

All things said, I believe there to be two distinct scales on which people must weigh potential spouses. One being love and the other being practical compatibility, for lack of a better term.

As Hegel does in his book, I will exclude discussion about the church as it relates to marriage, as it doesn’t deal with the ethical structure being discussed here.

Addition: I was rather pleased to have stumbled onto Eric Meyer’s summary of gay marriage, as my discussion here is compatible with homosexual marriage, only requiring love and devotion between two people. I am also happy that I won’t have to detail my views on the subject because Eric pretty much nails it on the head for me.