Element contents
Kant on Marriage
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 March 2025
Summary
This Element proposes a new understanding of Kant's account of marriage by examining the context and background conversations that shaped its development and by discussing the conception of equality at its core. Marriage as Kant understands it relies on a certain form of equality between spouses. Yet this conception of equality does not precede marriage, and carries important limitations – one of which being its inaccessibility to a significant proportion of the German population at the time. The protections and rights conferred by marriage were thus not accessible to all. Their shared preoccupation with this issue allows the author to put Kant's thoughts in relation with those of eighteenth-century feminist writers Theodor von Hippel and Marianne Ehrmann. Despite these limitations, the author finds that Kant's conception of marriage is compatible with the achievement of certain egalitarian goals, suggesting that it may be able to improve women's lives in a liberal state.
- Type
- Element
- Information
- Online ISBN: 9781009304559Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication: 30 April 2025
References
Achenwall, Gottfried. (2021) Natural Law. Edited by Kleingeld, Pauline, (trans. Corinna Vermeulen). Bloomsbury Press.Google Scholar
Altman, Matthew. (2010) “Kant on Sex and Marriage: The Implications for the Same-Sex Marriage Debate.” Kant-Studien 101 (3), 309–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Baier, Annette. (1993) “Moralism and Cruelty: Reflections on Hume and Kant.” Ethics 103 (3), 436–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beever, Allan. (2013) “Kant on the Law of Marriage.” Kantian Review 18 (3), 339–362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Biester, Johann Erich. (1783) “Vorschlag, die Geistlichen nicht mehr bei Vollziehung der Ehen zu bemühen.” Berlinische Monatsschrift 2, 265–276.Google Scholar
Bock, Gisela, & Zimmermann, Margarete. (1997) “Die Querelle des Femmes in Europa.” In Bock, Gisela, Zimmermann, Margarete, & Kopyczinski, Monika (eds.), Querelles. J. B. Metzler.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brake, Elizabeth. (2005) “Justice and Virtue in Kant’s Account of Marriage.” Kantian Review 9, 58–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brake, Elizabeth (2012) Minimizing Marriage: Marriage, Morality, and the Law. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandt, Reinhard. (1999) “Kants Forderung der Todesstrafe bei Duell- und Kindesmord”. In Niesen, Peter and Brunkhorst, Hauke (eds.) Das Recht der Republik. Suhrkamp, 268–287.Google Scholar
Broad, Jacqueline. (2014) “Mary Astell on Marriage and Lockean Slavery.” History of Political Thought 35 (4), 717–738.Google Scholar
Campt, Tina M. (2003) “Converging Spectres of an Other within: Race and Gender in Prewar Afro-German History”. Callaloo 26 (2), 322–341.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dyck, Corey W. (2021) “Introduction”. In Dyck, Corey W. (ed.), Women and Philosophy in Eighteenth-Century Germany. Oxford University Press, 1–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dawson, Ruth. (1986) “‘And This Shield Is Called – Self-Reliance’. Emerging Feminist Consciousness in the Late Eighteenth Century.” In Joeres, Ruth-Ellen & Maynes, Mary Jo (eds.), German Women in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries. Indiana University Press, 157–174.Google Scholar
Deligiorgi, Katerina. (2005) Kant and the Culture of Enlightenment. SUNY Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lara., Denis (1999) “Kant on the Wrongness of ‘Unnatural’ Sex”. History of Philosophy Quarterly 16 (2), 225–248.Google Scholar
Denis, Lara. (2001) “From Friendship to Marriage: Revising Kant.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 63 (1), 1–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Donahue, Charles. (2016) “The Legal Background: European Marriage Law from 16th to 19th century.” In Menchi, Silvana (ed.), Marriage in Europe, 1400–1800. University of Toronto Press, 33–60.Google Scholar
Du Moulin, Charles. (1546) Tractatus commerciorum et usurarum, redituumque pecunia constitutorum et monetarum. Galliot Du Pré.Google Scholar
Ehrmann, Marianne. (1790) Die unglückliche Hanne. Projekt Gutenberg. [www.projekt-gutenberg.org/ehrmann/unghanne/unghanne.html]Google Scholar
Emmett, Kelin. (2022) “Resisting Marriage, Reclaiming Right: An (Early) Modern Critique of Marriage.” Journal of the American Philosophical Association 8 (4), 721–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eser, Albin. (1986) “Reform of German Abortion Law: First Experiences”. The American Journal of Comparative Law 34 (2), 369–383.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Firestone, Shulamith. (1970) The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution. Morrow.Google Scholar
Forbes, Allauren. (2019) “Mary Astell on Bad Custom and Epistemic Injustice.” Hypatia 34 (4), 777–801.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fronius, Helen. (2003) The Diligent Dilettante: Women Writers in Germany 1770–1820. University of Oxford. [https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:d95009fe-e8ea-4bcf-b520-29f2e9e849b5/download_file?file_format=application%2Fpdf&safe_filename=602323289.pdf&type_of_work=Thesis]Google Scholar
Garcia, Manon. (2023) The Joy of Consent: A Philosophy of Good Sex. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Gerlings, Jonas. (2017) Freedom in Conflict: On Kant’s Critique of Medical Reason. European University Institute. PhD Thesis. [https://hdl.handle.net/1814/45887]Google Scholar
Guyer, Paul. (2000) Kant on Freedom, Law, and Happiness. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herman, Barbara. (1993) “Could It Be Worth Thinking about Kant on Sex and Marriage?” In Louise, M. Antony & Witt, Charlotte (eds.), A Mind of One’s Own: Feminist Essays on Reason and Objectivity. Westview Press, 49–68.Google Scholar
Hull, Isabel. (1996) Sexuality, State, and Civil Society in Germany, 1700–1815. Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. (1996) The Metaphysics of Morals (trans. M. Gregor). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1997) Critique of Practical Reason (trans. M. Gregor). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1997) Lectures on Ethics (trans. P. Heath & Schneewind, J. B.). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1998) Critique of Pure Reason (trans. P. Guyer & Wood, A.). Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2006) Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View (trans. R. Louden). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2006) “Idea for a Universal History from a Cosmopolitan Perspective.” In Kleingeld, Pauline (ed.), Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History. Yale University Press, 3–16.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2006) “An Answer to the Question: What Is Enlightenment.” In Kleingeld, Pauline, (ed.), Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History. Yale University Press, 17–23.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2006) “On the Common Saying: This May Be True in Theory, but It Does Not Hold in Practice.” In Kleingeld, Pauline (ed.), Toward Perpetual Peace and Other Writings on Politics, Peace, and History. Yale University Press, 44–66.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (2012) Groundwork of the Metaphysics of Morals (trans. M. J. Gregor & J. Timmermann). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Kleingeld, Pauline. (2019) “On Dealing with Kant’s Sexism and Racism.” SGIR Review 2 (2), 3–22.Google Scholar
Korsgaard, Christine. (1996) Creating the Kingdom of Ends. Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kundert, Ursula (2003). “The Polemic Trap: German Querelle Des Femmes and Misogynous Satire in the 17th Century.” Intellectual News 11 (1), 57–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, Margaret Brannan. (2016) Infanticide and Abortion in Early Modern Germany. Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Louden, Robert. (2021) “A Mere Skeleton of the Sciences? Amalia Holst’s Critique of Basedow and Campe.” In Corey, W. Dyck (ed.), Women and Philosophy in Eighteenth-Century Germany. Oxford University Press, 72–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madland, Helga. (1989) “Infanticide as Fiction: Goethe’s Urfaust and Schiller’s ‘Kindsmörderin’ as Models.” The German Quarterly 62 (1), 27–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madland, Helga (1992) “Gender and the German Literary Canon: Marianne Ehrmann’s Infanticide Fiction.” Monatshefte 84 (4), 405–416.Google Scholar
Mertens, Thomas. (2014) “Sexual Desire and the Importance of Marriage in Kant’s Philosophy of Law.” Ratio Juris 27 (3), 330–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Michalik, Kerstin. (2006) “The Development of the Discourse on Infanticide in the Late Eighteenth Century and the New Legal Standardization of the Offense in the Nineteenth Century.” In Gray, Marion & Gleixner, Ulrike (eds.), Gender in Transition: Discourse and Practice in German-Speaking Europe, 1750–1830. University of Michigan Press, 51–71.Google Scholar
Moses, Julia. (2019) “From Faith to Race? ‘Mixed Marriage’ and the Politics of Difference in Imperial Germany.” The History of the Family 24 (3), 466–493.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. (1982) “Women and the Making of the Sentimental Family.” Philosophy & Public Affairs 11 (1), 65–88.Google Scholar
O’Neill, Eileen & Lascano, Marcy. (2019) Feminist History of Philosophy: The Recovery and Evaluation of Women’s Philosophical Thought. Springer.Google Scholar
Papadaki, Evangelia. (2007) “Sexual Objectification: From Kant to Contemporary Feminism.” Contemporary Political Theory 6 (3), 330–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Papadaki, Evangelia (2010) “Kantian Marriage and Beyond: Why It Is Worth Thinking about Kant on Marriage.” Hypatia 25 (2), 276–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pascoe (2011). “Personhood, Protection, and Promiscuity: Kant on Infanticide and Institutions.” Unpublished draft. [https://jordanpascoe.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/pascoeinfanticide.pdf]Google Scholar
Pascoe (2018) “A Universal Estate: On Kant and Marriage Equality.” In Krasnoff, Larry, Madrid, Nuria Sánchez, & Satne, Paula (eds.), Kant’s Doctrine of Right in the 21st Century. University of Wales Press, 220–240.Google Scholar
Pascoe (2019) “On Finding Yourself in a State of Nature: A Kantian Account of Abortion and Voluntary Motherhood.” Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 5 (3), 1–28.Google Scholar
Piché, Claude. (2012) “Kant et l’esprit de secte en philosophie.” In Bacin, Stefano, Ferrarin, Alfredo, Rocca, Claudio La & Ruffing, Margit (eds.), Kant und die Philosophie in Weltbürgerlicher Absicht, Akten des XI. Internationalen Kant Kongresses, De Gruyter, 691–702.Google Scholar
Piché, Claude (2015) “Kantian Enlightenment as a Critique of Culture.” Con-Textos Kantianos 2 (2), 197–216.Google Scholar
Rich, Adrienne. (1995) Of Woman Born: Motherhood as Experience and Institution. Norton.Google Scholar
Sabourin, Charlotte. (2021a) “Kant’s Enlightenment and Women’s Peculiar Immaturity.” Kantian Review 26 (2), 235–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabourin, Charlotte (2021b) “Theodor von Hippel on the Status of Women in Germany.” In Dyck, Corey W. (ed.), Women and Philosophy in Eighteenth-Century Germany. Oxford University Press, 157–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabourin, Charlotte (2023a) “‘Nature and Society Give Women a Great Habit of Suffering’: Germaine de Staël’s Feminism and Its Challenges.” Southern Journal of Philosophy 61 (1), 133–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sabourin, Charlotte (2023b) “Critical Perspectives on Religion.” In Detlefsen, Karen & Shapiro, Lisa (eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Women and Early Modern European Philosophy. Routledge, 337–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, James. (1989) “The Question of Enlightenment: Kant, Mendelssohn, and the Mittwochsgesellschaft.” Journal of the History of Ideas 50 (2), 269–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sticker, Martin. (2020) “The Case against Different-Sex Marriage in Kant.” Kantian Review 25 (3), 441–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stuckenberg, Johann Heinrich Willbrand (1882) The Life of Immanuel Kant. Thoemmes Press.Google Scholar
Sussman, David. (2008) “Shame and Punishment in Kant’s ‘Doctrine of Right’.” The Philosophical Quarterly 231 (58), 299–317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Timmermann, Jens. (2022) “The Quandary of Infanticide in Kant’s ‘Doctrine of Right’.” Archiv für Geschichte der Philosophie 106 (2), 267–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uleman, Jennifer. (2000) “On Kant, Infanticide, and Finding Oneself in a State of Nature.” Zeitschrift für philosophische Forschung 54 (2), 173–195.Google Scholar
Varden, Helga. (2017) “Kant and Women.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 98 (4), 653–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Varden, Helga (2020) Sex, Love, and Gender: A Kantian Theory. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
von Berlepsch, Emilie. (1791) “Ueber einige zum Glück der Ehe nothwendige Eigenschaften und Grundsätze.” Neuer Teutscher Merkur 2, 63–102.Google Scholar
von Hippel, Theodor Gottlieb (2009) The Status of Women: Collected Writings. Edited by Sellner, Timothy F.. Xlibris.Google Scholar
Westphal, Kenneth R. (1997) “Do Kant’s Principles Justify Property or Usufruct?” Jahrbuch für Recht und Ethik 5, 141–194.Google Scholar
Williams, Howard (2006) “Liberty, Equality, and Independence: Core Concepts in Kant’s Political Philosophy.” In Bird, Graham (ed.), A Companion to Kant. Blackwell Books, 364–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Donald. (2004) “Kant and the Marriage Right.” Pacific Philosophical Quarterly 85 (1), 103–123.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolff, Christian. (1747) Vernünfftige Gedancken Von dem Gesellschafftlichen Leben der Menschen Und insonderheit Dem gemeinen Wesen: Zu Beförderung der Glückseeligkeit des menschlichen Geschlechtes. Renger.Google Scholar
Wunder, Heide. (2016) “Marriage in the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation.” In Menchi, Silvana (ed.), Marriage in Europe, 1400–1800. University of Toronto Press, 61–93.Google Scholar