George W. Bush has, along with many others, made the claim that marriage is the fundamental basis of civilization. Is there any reasonable argument to be made supporting this claim? If not, is there another institution that makes a better candidate for being the fundamental basis of civilization?

Comments

I take it that the thinking is that the family is the "basis of civilization" and that marriage is the basis of the family.

Both claims can be doubted. More importantly, their conjunction can be: It may well be that each claim can seem plausible, in its own right, but that is because one is understanding the word "family" in different senses both times. Perhaps there is some sense in which it's obvious that family groups are fundamental social units. But what a "family group" is, in that sense, needn't have much to do with "nucelar families" in the sense our President thinks of them. Or again, it may seem obvious that there is some sense in which marriage, by which I mean a committed long-term relationship between adults, is the basis of the family. But then one is of course thinking of "family" in a particular sense, and it's entirely unobvious why families in that sense are the foundation of civilization.

Regarding the last question: Why think that civilization needs to have a "fundamental basis" in the relevant sense?

I agree with Richard that, to the extent that there is anything to thisidea, it is based on a particular view about the importance of thefamily to human civilization. Traditionally, the family is the social unit inwhich human children are raised, acquire values, and develop moralcharacter (i.e., are civilized). Proponents of the view that you aredescribing make the further assumption that the family is the bestsocial institution for raising children. The idea here is that, inorder to be psychologically healthy, children need to feel confidentthat the adults in their lives will do their best to take care of themand won’t take off whenever they see greener pastures elsewhere. Thenorms of family relationships, unlike the norms that govern other sortsof social relationships, demand such care and count against such“trading up.” And finally, proponents of the view that you describe maintain that, associal institutions for raising children, families are more likely tobe stable and successful when they are headed by two adults in acommitted long-term relationship (i.e., marriage), since it’s reallyhard (though certainly not impossible) to be a single,working parent.

Read another response by Richard Heck, Jyl Gentzler

Read another response about Children, Justice