Which is better: an arranged marriage or a love marriage?

In western society, we view arranged marriages as outdated, and heinous in some cases. However, I believe that in doing so, we disregard many important aspects of an arranged marriage. Statistically, an arranged marriage has a lower likelihood of divorce. I believe this is due to these pairings' heightened sense of commitment. Driven by culture, these couples have a sense of duty towards marriage. Arranged couples begin a marriage without love, and expect it to last a lifetime. They are statistically more likely to make it last a lifetime! It’s hard to believe that these couples never grow to love each other. I’m sure that many grow to love each other unconditionally. So, this practice seems to do a better job of upholding the permanence of marriage. Which, really is the entire concept of marriage outside of religious factors. But, I don’t know that arranged marriages are the better practice.

In western society, we romanticize love marriages. We set out to find our perfect partner. But, there is no such thing as perfect. There is only a spectrum of compatibility. Some people do find partners so compatible, that they might as well be perfect. However, the divorce rate in western society hints that there are other factors at play. People change over time for example. Exceptional compatibility might turn into abysmal compatibility. This compatibility fluctuates even in arranged marriages. I’m suggesting, that in western society, we are more likely to give up on marriage due to a lack of duty. Marriage isn’t viewed as a sacred practice, love is the sacred practice. But the intensity of love fluctuates, and ideal, unconditional love takes great effort. Staying in a marriage takes a great amount of effort. I believe that western society has trivialized marriage by idealizing love.

Love marriage is better than an arranged marriage. I understand that what I’ve written, suggests the contrary. But, my critique of love marriages is cultural criticism, not a disdain for the practice. So, the prevalence of poor marriage ideals cannot discredit love marriages. In love marriages, you get free will. You get to choose your partner. You get to appreciate your initial compatibility. You get to feel love at the altar, not after it. This free will makes love marriages better than arranged marriages. Without free will, we are slaves to the procedure. However, by not understanding love, and trivializing marriage, you don’t get to experience what lasting love is. You spend your time chasing an initial connection. For a lot of people, this initial connection is an illusion. They fall in love with a mirror of their love. They don’t learn how to fall in love with another person. This is why arranged marriages are more successful. There is a higher sense of duty to the permanence of marriage. Therefore, these couples are more likely to generate a lasting love for another person through time, and their cultural bonds.

In an ideal marriage, you marry for love. Therefore, you have practised your free will. You also continue to practice your free will unconstrained by cultural bonds. You stay in your marriage not because your culture commands a sense of duty, but because you demand a sense of duty from yourself. Through this duty, you learn how to generate lasting love for your spouse, and uphold your ideals of marriage. In conclusion, while both marriage types can be completely fulfilling, love marriages are philosophically ideal because they require the greatest degree of self-sacrifice. A single man who is not in a committed relationship may take it upon himself to be the moral compass of his fellow single men. He can become the moral authority for marriage and the mesosphere, condemning all divorce, imposing celibacy on all men who are not married of their own free will and demanding that biological women be treated with respect.