Kant's Categorical Imperative
The Ethical Law "Kant's Categorical Imperative" does not involve considering the outcome of an action, but looks at if the action itself is "good" or "bad" by asking whether one would make it a universal rule. Kant says that we should only carry out actions we would be willing to "universalize" and this means we should only allow the performing of an action if it was okay to do it all the time- there wouldn't be any exceptions. He basically said that if something was morally (un)acceptable in some situations, it should be morally (un)acceptable in all situations.
In this way, arranged marriage would be seen as the wrong thing- of course there are still two ways of looking at it. It could be thought that if the two people wanted the arranged marriage then that is morally acceptable, however this would mean everyone whose family was planning an arranged marriage for them who didn't actually want one and people who had planned to have a love marriage would be forced to have an arranged one, and this is morally unacceptable. On the other hand, it is morally unacceptable for the people who don't want an arranged marriage that are being pressurized into it to have one, but this would mean no one could have one, even those that wanted one.
Logically regarding Kant's Categorical Imperative, it would be better if arranged marriages were banned altogether, rather than allowed; it is a question of everyone being forced to have one, or no one being allowed to have one. Statistically there are many more people who want love marriages than arranged marriages, therefore less people would be unhappy if arranged marriages were banned. Also, being forced to marry someone could lead to a large amount of psychological disorders where as not being allowed to have an arranged marriage would not lead to such severe consequences. It is the small amount of people who actually want an arranged marriage vs. all the people who want a love marriage PLUS those who planned to have an arranged marriage that don't actually want one, and in this case the latter would win.
It is due to the fact that there would be a lot more distress if everyone was forced to have an arranged marriage as opposed to no one being allowed one, that arranged marriages are WRONG on the terms of Kant's Categorical Imperative Theory.
The Ethical Law "Kant's Categorical Imperative" does not involve considering the outcome of an action, but looks at if the action itself is "good" or "bad" by asking whether one would make it a universal rule. Kant says that we should only carry out actions we would be willing to "universalize" and this means we should only allow the performing of an action if it was okay to do it all the time- there wouldn't be any exceptions. He basically said that if something was morally (un)acceptable in some situations, it should be morally (un)acceptable in all situations.
In this way, arranged marriage would be seen as the wrong thing- of course there are still two ways of looking at it. It could be thought that if the two people wanted the arranged marriage then that is morally acceptable, however this would mean everyone whose family was planning an arranged marriage for them who didn't actually want one and people who had planned to have a love marriage would be forced to have an arranged one, and this is morally unacceptable. On the other hand, it is morally unacceptable for the people who don't want an arranged marriage that are being pressurized into it to have one, but this would mean no one could have one, even those that wanted one.
Logically regarding Kant's Categorical Imperative, it would be better if arranged marriages were banned altogether, rather than allowed; it is a question of everyone being forced to have one, or no one being allowed to have one. Statistically there are many more people who want love marriages than arranged marriages, therefore less people would be unhappy if arranged marriages were banned. Also, being forced to marry someone could lead to a large amount of psychological disorders where as not being allowed to have an arranged marriage would not lead to such severe consequences. It is the small amount of people who actually want an arranged marriage vs. all the people who want a love marriage PLUS those who planned to have an arranged marriage that don't actually want one, and in this case the latter would win.
It is due to the fact that there would be a lot more distress if everyone was forced to have an arranged marriage as opposed to no one being allowed one, that arranged marriages are WRONG on the terms of Kant's Categorical Imperative Theory.