Whitehead's Eight Categories of Existence in Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing
At first, they couldn’t stand each other, constantly trading witty insults and denying any interest in love. At least so it seemed. He vowed he would never marry, and she swore she’d never fall for someone like him.
Yet, their friends saw through the facade. Beneath the banter lay a mutual affection, a romantic love masked by sharp words. Their insults were not just verbal sparring—they were protective armor, expressions of affection, and playful jabs all at once: layers upon layers of contrasts. Contrasts of contrasts of contrasts: linguistic, emotional, physical, and intellectual.
Sensing the unspoken connection, their friends devised a scheme to expose it. Each was made to overhear conversations hinting that the other secretly harbored deep feelings. Gradually, the teasing gave way to reflection, and both began to realize there was more between them than they had admitted.
When she tested his love by asking him to challenge his closest friend, he hesitated but ultimately sided with her, proving his loyalty. By the end, they let down their defenses, confessed their true feelings, and agreed to marry—turning their playful rivalry into genuine affection. And yet we sense that, after marrying, their playful sparring continued as a mode of affection. Jest and humor, teasing and playful insults were, for them a modus operandi.
I am talking about Beatrice and Benedick in Shakespeare’s romantic comedy, Much Ado About Nothing. There are strong hints in the play that they knew each other before the events of Much Ado About Nothing. Their sharp exchanges suggest a shared history, with Beatrice even alluding to a past encounter: "I know you of old" (Act 1, Scene 1). It’s implied that they may have had romantic feelings in the past or at least some kind of close relationship, but it ended on uncertain or sour terms, contributing to the tension and animosity they display toward each other initially. This backstory adds depth to their witty banter, as it reflects unresolved emotions beneath the surface, making their eventual reconciliation and love all the more satisfying.
*
This page is entitled "Romantic Love as Embodied Metaphysics." Here I am referring to the dynamics of romantic banter and, indeed, romantic love in Beatrice and Benedick. It seems to me that the eight categories of existence in Whitehead's philosophy of organism, as articulated in "Process and Reality," might illuminate some of those dynamics. The categories of existence are: propositions, prehensions, subjective forms, contrasts, actual entities, nexūs, eternal objects, and multiplicities. Here is how they are embodied in the relationship beween the two.
Propositions (Lures for Feeling):
Each interaction between Beatrice and Benedick presents new propositions—lures that invite them to feel differently about one another. Their witty exchanges suggest possibilities: What if there’s more to this than rivalry? What if affection lies beneath the teasing? These propositions gently lure them toward new feelings, even if neither fully admits it at first.
Related to this idea of propositions is what Whitehead calls "subjective aims." These are the propositions that guide an act of experience: implicit or explicit goals. Both Beatrice and Benedick’s conscious aims seem to be self-protection—resisting vulnerability by keeping romance at bay. Yet beneath these conscious aims lies a deeper, unconscious desire: to connect and love without losing their independence. Their playful interactions are shaped by these layered subjective aims, continually evolving as they become more receptive to each other.
Also related to propositions is what Whitehead calls "physical purposes." These are subjective aims, the aim of which is immediate physical satisfaction. The sexual desire between Beatrice and Benedick is one kind of physical purpose, woven beneath and within their more psychological desire for intimacy.
Prehensions (Feelings of the Past and Present):
Their banter is built on a history of misunderstandings, frustrations, and affection. Each prehends (or grasps) the other not just as an isolated moment but with the weight of prior encounters. The sarcasm in Beatrice’s words, for instance, prehends past slights and perceived arrogance, while Benedick’s teasing prehends his frustration with their unacknowledged attraction.
Subjective Forms (Emotions):
The emotional texture of their interactions—their subjective forms—ranges from frustration and amusement to affection and longing. Sarcasm, laughter, and irritation are not merely emotional reactions; they actively shape how each moment unfolds. The humor they share softens their emotional defenses, creating space for tenderness disguised as jest.
Contrasts:
Their relationship thrives on contrasts—love and resistance, affection and mockery, independence and intimacy. These contrasts enrich their interactions, generating a dynamic tension that both frustrates and excites them. Rather than flattening these contrasts, they embrace them, finding playfulness in their differences.
Actual Entities (Moments of Experience):
Each exchange is an actual entity—a discrete moment of experience shaped by everything that has come before. In their witty repartee, each verbal jab is a moment of improvisation—both a reaction to what has been said and a preparation for what will follow. Every line contributes to the evolving story of their relationship.
Nexūs (Society of Actual Entities):
Beatrice and Benedick’s interactions do not exist in isolation but within a nexus of social relations. Their friends, observing the connection that even they deny, serve as catalysts, influencing the way Beatrice and Benedick engage with each other. This social nexus plays a pivotal role in shaping the trajectory of their relationship.
Eternal Objects (Potential Forms of Feeling):
Their banter is animated by eternal objects—the potential forms of feeling available in each moment. Humor, anger, affection, and longing are ever-present possibilities within their interactions. They creatively draw on these potentials to shape their encounters, and over time, they begin to actualize the eternal object of love, transforming potentiality into reality.
Multiplicities:
Their relationship exemplifies the richness of multiplicity—the simultaneous presence of competing desires, emotions, and aims. Rather than resolving these tensions into a single, unified outcome, Beatrice and Benedick’s dynamic demonstrates that multiplicity can be a source of vitality. Love, for them, is not a reduction to sameness but an ongoing interplay between independence and connection, rivalry and tenderness. Their evolving relationship illustrates that multiplicity invites creative negotiation rather than resolution.
In a Whiteheadian sense, multiplicity is the ground for becoming—it resists closure, opening space for novelty and transformation. Just as each actual entity holds traces of many past experiences while luring toward fresh possibilities, Beatrice and Benedick embody the creative tension of multiplicity. Their love is neither static nor final but an ever-unfolding process, enriched by contrasts and shaped by the interplay of what has been, what is, and what could be. Through this lens, we see that love—and life itself—thrives not despite multiplicity but because of it.