grundlinien.de

176

Because marriage is, at first, only the immediate ethical Idea, and thus has its objective actuality in the inwardness of subjective disposition and feeling, there lies in this the first contingency of its existence. Just as little as compulsion can take place to enter into marriage, just as little is there otherwise a merely legal, positive bond capable of holding the subjects together once adverse and hostile dispositions and actions have arisen. But a third ethical authority is required, one which upholds the right of marriage, of ethical substantiality, against mere opinion about such a disposition, and against the contingency of a merely temporary mood and the like, distinguishes this from total estrangement, and establishes the latter, in order, only in this case, to be able to dissolve the marriage.

DE

Comments

2 responses to “176”

  1. Hegel (Notes) Avatar
    Hegel (Notes)

    Dissolution of the family, α) ethical, β) necessary
    α) contingency of disposition
    β) the children’s coming of age
    γ) natural – through death, – inheritance –
    Dissolution of this particular family – the more general, wider one takes its place, kinship by blood – where this particular one is dissolved – no general one is any longer present – where is the property to go?
    To bring the ethical, the religious, to consciousness, holding fast to it against opinions and contingent moods

  2. Eduard Gans (Additions) Avatar
    Eduard Gans (Additions)

    Because marriage rests only on subjective, contingent feeling, it can be dissolved. The state, by contrast, is not subject to dissolution, for it rests on law. Marriage ought indeed to be indissoluble, but here too it remains a mere ought. Yet since it is something ethical, it cannot be dissolved by arbitrary will, but only by an ethical authority, be this the church or the court. If a total estrangement has occurred, as for example through adultery, then the religious authority too must permit the divorce.

Leave a Reply