Hechomachean Ethics Vs Fault Divorce

1995 Words 8 Pages
Throughout the years, more and more people have taken it upon themselves to end their marriage and get a divorce. This practice is defined as the “the legal dissolution of a marriage by a court or other competent body” (Dictionary.com), meaning it is acknowledged legally by a judge, and lawyers. The reasons for divorce legally range from no fault divorce to fault divorce. No fault divorce is deemed when the couple has mutually agreed to end the marriage, after they felt that the marriage wasn’t worth saving. On the other hand, fault divorce has different regulation and requirements. Fault divorce is based on one person from the couple who has to prove that the other person committed a crime against he/her or did something wrong to destroy the …show more content…
In Aristotle’s time divorce wasn’t an option, although Aristotle brings up a point in the translated book, by Robert G. Bartlett and Susan D. Collins, Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, about friendship and what circumstances is it acceptable to allow the friendship to fade. Aristotle specifically talks about this in book 9, where he begins with explaining how heterogeneous friendships are based on balance and proportionality. If a friendship is considered to be disproportional, meaning that one person is giving more than the other, or doesn’t have what the other wants, then the friendship is not considered stable and will dissolve. This is comparable to when someone marries the other for a certain advantage, when one of the lovers has wealth or power that the other seeks, but when all of that is lost the marriage is doomed since the reason for love is lost. Aristotle accepts this claim while still stating that this type of friendship is not based on goodness. Although, Aristotle does take into account the fact that people change and sometimes couples come into situations where they cannot move forward. In his readings, Aristotle states: “Or should one not do this (dissolve the friendship) in this case, but only in the case of those whose corruption is incurable? And as for those who can be set aright, one must come to their aid, more as regards their character than their property…” (Aristotle, 192). He goes on to explain how when someone has reached a level, even after everything that could be done was done, distance must be made. This applies to when a partner has involved himself in substances and has reached a level of addiction that surpassed any form of help; at this point the spouse has every right to abandon the marriage, especially if the addicted spouse was completely different before the marriage. The readings continue on to support this ides by talking about

Related Documents