I have a friend who is tired of the word "relationality." "It's empty of meaning," she says, "and it just makes everybody feel good at the expense of being honest."
She's right. In process-relational philosophy, "relationality" can easily become a cliché, especially when it overlooks the fact that relationality can be healthy or unhealthy, oppressive or just, loving or unloving. Violence, too, is a form of relationality, of mutual immanence, as is the master-slave relationship. The need is to distinguish between healthy and unhealthy forms of relationality.
In her appropriation of Iris Murdoch's idea that the world today needs an "ethic of loving attention," Judith Jones points toward a vision of healthy relationality. Her vision encompasses not only other people but also the more-than-human world, while safeguarding the intensity and joy of satisfying immediacy for individuals in the moment. This satisfying intensity is enriched, not diminished, when other centers of subjectivity are lovingly included in the creation of felt contrasts. For Jones, we are both subjects of our own lives and superjects for others, with neither role excluding the other. Loving attention, as Jones envisions it, is a healthy form of superjecting—urgently needed in an age marked by violence and excessive self-promotion.
She's right. In process-relational philosophy, "relationality" can easily become a cliché, especially when it overlooks the fact that relationality can be healthy or unhealthy, oppressive or just, loving or unloving. Violence, too, is a form of relationality, of mutual immanence, as is the master-slave relationship. The need is to distinguish between healthy and unhealthy forms of relationality.
In her appropriation of Iris Murdoch's idea that the world today needs an "ethic of loving attention," Judith Jones points toward a vision of healthy relationality. Her vision encompasses not only other people but also the more-than-human world, while safeguarding the intensity and joy of satisfying immediacy for individuals in the moment. This satisfying intensity is enriched, not diminished, when other centers of subjectivity are lovingly included in the creation of felt contrasts. For Jones, we are both subjects of our own lives and superjects for others, with neither role excluding the other. Loving attention, as Jones envisions it, is a healthy form of superjecting—urgently needed in an age marked by violence and excessive self-promotion.
Jones, Murdoch, and Whitehead
Healthy and Unhealthy Relationality
In Intensity: An Essay in Whiteheadian Ontology (Vanderbilt University Press, 1998), Judith Jones explores the distinction between private and public experience through the concept of intensity, drawing on Whitehead's idea that we are both subjects of our own experiences and "superjects" in the experiences of others. This dual role resonates with the interdisciplinary field of Performance Studies, which examines how individuals continuously "perform" and "curate" themselves for others.
Performance Studies, which originated in theater but now spans various aspects of life, suggests that humans are always engaged in self-presentation, whether through gestures, speech, clothing, or online personas. These performances often seek validation in a competitive and status-preoccupied social landscape. What Jones identifies as the process of "superjecting" ourselves into the lives of others mirrors this idea of performance: we are not only subjects of our lives but also objects of others’ perceptions.
However, this relationality, a hallmark of Whiteheadian thought, brings challenges. While relationality promises rich connections, it can also become life-depleting. The continual pressure to meet external expectations—whether conforming to societal norms or maintaining a particular self-image—can lead to inner dissonance. This dissonance arises when the image a person presents externally conflicts with their deeper, authentic self. Jones argues that such tension is rightly resolved through an ethic of loving attention to others as subjects in their own right, not merely as objects from whom to seek approval or as subjects to whose expectations one must conform. The pursuit of flattery or oppressive conformity are also forms of relationality, but they trap individuals in cycles of performance, where their worth becomes tied to the images they project and the validation they seek. Similarly, communities can suffer from collective pressures of self-curation. When a group's identity becomes too rigidly defined by external standards, it stifles individuality and creativity. Relationality, in this context, can suppress diversity and create an oppressive environment, as people are pressured to conform rather than express themselves authentically.
Thus, while relationality is fundamental to experience, it requires careful navigation. To avoid relationality becoming a source of suffering, individuals and communities must find a balance between connection and authenticity, between the shared pursuit of intensity and the preservation of individual integrity. Jones points us toward this balance with her ethic of love.
Iris Murdoch on Loving Attention
In Intensity, Jones masterfully develops an ethic of love, drawing from Whitehead’s understanding of experience and Iris Murdoch's notion of attention. Murdoch’s ethic of attention is rooted in her belief that moral transformation occurs through the quality of attention we give to others and the world. For Murdoch, attention is a form of deep, patient, and loving awareness, shaped by an openness to reality that transcends the self's desires, illusions, and egocentrism. She contrasts this with the self-centered focus typical of much human behavior, where individuals impose their own needs and fantasies on others rather than perceiving them as they truly are. Murdoch, drawing on Simone Weil's concept of attention, extended this idea in her own unique way, emphasizing that moral improvement involves refining one’s ability to see clearly and truly, which requires detachment from self-centered concerns.
For Murdoch, love is a form of just and accurate perception of reality. True moral action stems from this kind of attention, rather than from abstract principles or rational calculations. Attentiveness cultivates virtues like humility, love, and respect for the moral complexities of life. This "unselfing" allows individuals to encounter the good, which, for Murdoch, exists independently and can be apprehended through proper attention.
*
In both Jones' and Murdoch's views, relationality and loving attention are essential to human experience but require balance and care to avoid becoming life-depleting. Jones’ insight into Whitehead’s metaphysics, coupled with Murdoch’s ethical vision, emphasizes that authentic relationality—grounded in love and genuine attention to others—leads to a richer, more fulfilling life. Only by balancing our connection to others with a commitment to authentic self-expression can we navigate the pressures of performance and validation. This ethic of love, then, becomes both a philosophical and practical guide to living in harmony with oneself and others.
In Intensity: An Essay in Whiteheadian Ontology (Vanderbilt University Press, 1998), Judith Jones explores the distinction between private and public experience through the concept of intensity, drawing on Whitehead's idea that we are both subjects of our own experiences and "superjects" in the experiences of others. This dual role resonates with the interdisciplinary field of Performance Studies, which examines how individuals continuously "perform" and "curate" themselves for others.
Performance Studies, which originated in theater but now spans various aspects of life, suggests that humans are always engaged in self-presentation, whether through gestures, speech, clothing, or online personas. These performances often seek validation in a competitive and status-preoccupied social landscape. What Jones identifies as the process of "superjecting" ourselves into the lives of others mirrors this idea of performance: we are not only subjects of our lives but also objects of others’ perceptions.
However, this relationality, a hallmark of Whiteheadian thought, brings challenges. While relationality promises rich connections, it can also become life-depleting. The continual pressure to meet external expectations—whether conforming to societal norms or maintaining a particular self-image—can lead to inner dissonance. This dissonance arises when the image a person presents externally conflicts with their deeper, authentic self. Jones argues that such tension is rightly resolved through an ethic of loving attention to others as subjects in their own right, not merely as objects from whom to seek approval or as subjects to whose expectations one must conform. The pursuit of flattery or oppressive conformity are also forms of relationality, but they trap individuals in cycles of performance, where their worth becomes tied to the images they project and the validation they seek. Similarly, communities can suffer from collective pressures of self-curation. When a group's identity becomes too rigidly defined by external standards, it stifles individuality and creativity. Relationality, in this context, can suppress diversity and create an oppressive environment, as people are pressured to conform rather than express themselves authentically.
Thus, while relationality is fundamental to experience, it requires careful navigation. To avoid relationality becoming a source of suffering, individuals and communities must find a balance between connection and authenticity, between the shared pursuit of intensity and the preservation of individual integrity. Jones points us toward this balance with her ethic of love.
Iris Murdoch on Loving Attention
In Intensity, Jones masterfully develops an ethic of love, drawing from Whitehead’s understanding of experience and Iris Murdoch's notion of attention. Murdoch’s ethic of attention is rooted in her belief that moral transformation occurs through the quality of attention we give to others and the world. For Murdoch, attention is a form of deep, patient, and loving awareness, shaped by an openness to reality that transcends the self's desires, illusions, and egocentrism. She contrasts this with the self-centered focus typical of much human behavior, where individuals impose their own needs and fantasies on others rather than perceiving them as they truly are. Murdoch, drawing on Simone Weil's concept of attention, extended this idea in her own unique way, emphasizing that moral improvement involves refining one’s ability to see clearly and truly, which requires detachment from self-centered concerns.
For Murdoch, love is a form of just and accurate perception of reality. True moral action stems from this kind of attention, rather than from abstract principles or rational calculations. Attentiveness cultivates virtues like humility, love, and respect for the moral complexities of life. This "unselfing" allows individuals to encounter the good, which, for Murdoch, exists independently and can be apprehended through proper attention.
*
In both Jones' and Murdoch's views, relationality and loving attention are essential to human experience but require balance and care to avoid becoming life-depleting. Jones’ insight into Whitehead’s metaphysics, coupled with Murdoch’s ethical vision, emphasizes that authentic relationality—grounded in love and genuine attention to others—leads to a richer, more fulfilling life. Only by balancing our connection to others with a commitment to authentic self-expression can we navigate the pressures of performance and validation. This ethic of love, then, becomes both a philosophical and practical guide to living in harmony with oneself and others.
Iris Murdoch: A Scholarly Discussion
Melvyn Bragg and guests discuss the author and philosopher Iris Murdoch (1919 - 1999). In her lifetime she was most celebrated for her novels such as The Bell and The Black Prince, but these are now sharing the spotlight with her philosophy. Responding to the horrors of the Second World War, she argued that morality was not subjective or a matter of taste, as many of her contemporaries held, but was objective, and good was a fact we could recognize. To tell good from bad, though, we would need to see the world as it really is, not as we want to see it, and her novels are full of characters who are not yet enlightened enough to do that.
With
Anil Gomes
Fellow and Tutor in Philosophy at Trinity College, University of Oxford
Anne Rowe
Visiting Professor at the University of Chichester and Emeritus Research Fellow with the Iris Murdoch Archive Project at Kingston University
And
Miles Leeson
Director of the Iris Murdoch Research Centre and Reader in English Literature at the University of Chichester
Producer: Simon Tillotson
With
Anil Gomes
Fellow and Tutor in Philosophy at Trinity College, University of Oxford
Anne Rowe
Visiting Professor at the University of Chichester and Emeritus Research Fellow with the Iris Murdoch Archive Project at Kingston University
And
Miles Leeson
Director of the Iris Murdoch Research Centre and Reader in English Literature at the University of Chichester
Producer: Simon Tillotson