For Iris Murdoch, Morality Is About Love, Not Duties and Rules
Why Read This
What Makes This Article Worth Your Time
Summary
What This Article Is About
Cathy Mason examines philosopher-novelist Iris Murdoch’s radical claim that love, not Kantian duties and rules, lies at morality’s center—specifically attentive love enabling us to truly see and respond to others. While Kantian thinkers argue morality concerns impartial duties toward all equally (with love’s partiality and unpredictability seeming irrelevant or conflicting), Murdoch insists in essays like “The Idea of Perfection” (1962) and “On ‘God’ and ‘Good'” (1969) that “love is a central concept in morals.” Her argument begins with redefining morality’s core: not choice but vision—”the way we see the world” determines how we act, making the key moral activity attention (concept from Simone Weil) rather than decision-making. Mason illustrates through Murdoch’s famous M-and-D example: mother-in-law M sees daughter-in-law D as “common, unpolished, lacking in dignity and refinement”—D’s accent, dress, and manner grating against M’s sense of decorum. Though M behaves “beautifully” outwardly, her hostile snobbish vision itself constitutes moral failing, demonstrating how “thinking about others in a hostile way is morally significant even if it never eventuates in outward action.”
Why do we distort vision? Murdoch argues the ego prevents true seeing through self-deception and fantasy—”We are anxiety-ridden animals. Our minds are continually active, fabricating an anxious, usually self-preoccupied, often falsifying veil which partially conceals the world.” The ego’s self-centeredness produces fantasies reflecting our concerns rather than reality, shaped by both social convention (M’s class stereotypes) and neurosis (personal anxieties like M’s jealousy at D displacing her from her son’s life). These ego-driven fantasies have “great power over us” precisely because “they speak so strongly to our egos.” What overcomes this? Loving attention—”a kind of just, patient, generous attention to others” drawing us outward from self-centered concerns toward reality as it truly is. Murdoch writes: “It is in the capacity to love, that is to see, that the liberation of the soul from fantasy consists.” In lovingly attending, we care about things “for their own sake” rather than relation to our concerns, enabling truth-grasping our ordinary ego-distorted looking cannot achieve. Continuing the M-D story, when M “really does want to do the right thing,” she reflects on her snobbery and jealousy, then “attends carefully, patiently and generously to D,” gradually seeing her as “refreshingly simple” rather than vulgar, appreciating “spontaneity” rather than seeing undignified behavior, recognizing “pleasantly youthful” rather than irritatingly childish—this “exercise in loving attention” means “setting the ego aside and really coming to grasp the reality of another individual.” While ordinary human love can mislead (Romeo initially loving Rosaline), such failures represent “defective, or at least imperfect, form of love”—attentive love represents the ideal. This connects to millennia-old religious traditions (Judaism, Christianity, Buddhism) positioning love centrally, reframing Romeo and Juliet’s love as “rare moment of undistorted blinding insight into the infinite and irreplaceable value of others.” Cultivating attentive love requires no “quick fixes” but gradual practice: consciously dragging ourselves from our concerns toward patient attention to others (recognizing an arrogant acquaintance’s insecurity enabling compassionate response), responding to dim awareness of judging harshly by looking outward requiring “significant creative imagination,” and even engaging with “art, skill and craft” teaching us to “focus on something outside of ourselves” with humility recognizing “initial impressions may need to be rethought.” Attentive love thus becomes “a possibility for us all,” requiring only that “we take the time to wrench ourselves away from the insatiable ego and orient ourselves towards the difficult reality of other people.”
Key Points
Main Takeaways
Vision Not Choice as Morality’s Core
Murdoch redefines morality’s center from Kantian choice/duty to vision—”the way we see the world” determines action. Key moral activity becomes attention (Simone Weil’s concept) shaping how we build fairer, just pictures or distort reality through continuous looking.
M-and-D Demonstrates Vision’s Moral Significance
Mother-in-law M sees D as “common, unpolished, lacking dignity”—though M behaves “beautifully” outwardly, her hostile snobbish vision itself constitutes moral failing, proving “thinking about others in hostile way is morally significant even if it never eventuates in outward action.”
Ego Produces Fantasy Obscuring Reality
The ego—”anxiety-ridden,” “utterly self-centred”—fabricates “an anxious, usually self-preoccupied, often falsifying veil which partially conceals the world,” producing fantasies shaped by social convention (class stereotypes) and neurosis (personal anxieties) preventing true seeing of others.
Loving Attention Liberates from Fantasy
“It is in the capacity to love, that is to see, that the liberation of the soul from fantasy consists”—loving attention draws us outward from self-centered concerns toward reality, caring about things “for their own sake” enabling truth-grasping our ordinary ego-distorted looking cannot achieve.
M’s Transformation Through Patient Attention
When M reflects on her snobbery/jealousy and “attends carefully, patiently and generously to D,” vision transforms: seeing D as “refreshingly simple” not vulgar, appreciating “spontaneity” not undignified behavior—”exercise in loving attention” means “setting ego aside and really coming to grasp reality of another.”
Cultivating Love Through Gradual Practice
No “quick fixes” but gradual cultivation: consciously dragging ourselves toward patient attention recognizing others’ complexities, responding to dim awareness of judging harshly with outward-looking requiring creative imagination, and engaging art/craft teaching humility about initial impressions needing rethinking.
Master Reading Comprehension
Practice with 365 curated articles and 2,400+ questions across 9 RC types.
Article Analysis
Breaking Down the Elements
Main Idea
Vision-Centered Ethics Through Attentive Love
Murdoch positions attentive love as morality’s core by reconceptualizing ethics: not Kantian choice but vision determining action. M-and-D demonstrates hostile perception itself constitutes moral failing despite beautiful behavior. Ego fabricates distorting fantasies shaped by convention and neurosis. Loving attention—”just, patient, generous”—liberates from fantasy enabling true seeing of others.
Purpose
Recovering Murdochian Ethics for Contemporary Readers
Recovers Murdoch’s neglected philosophy demonstrating “love is central to morality” deserves serious consideration despite sounding strange to Kantian/utilitarian-dominated contemporary ears. Simultaneously expository, rehabilitative, and constructive—targeting educated general readers through accessible explanations maintaining rigor. Functions challenging action-centered ethics’ dominance while recovering virtue ethics resources. Concludes with practical cultivation advice enabling readers practicing Murdochian ethics.
Structure
Problem → Reconceptualization → Example → Diagnosis → Solution → Practice
Opens establishing problem: love seems separate from impartial morality. Presents Murdoch’s reconceptualization: vision not choice as morality’s core. M-and-D example demonstrates vision’s moral significance pedagogically. Diagnostic analysis explains ego’s distorting fantasies. Solution: loving attention liberates. Returns showing M’s transformation. Concludes with practical cultivation advice making philosophy actionable—moving from puzzle through examples toward application.
Tone
Pedagogical Clarity Balancing Accessibility and Depth
Pedagogically clear yet philosophically serious—explaining challenging ideas accessibly while preserving conceptual sophistication. Opens with experiential grounding establishing emotional resonance. Combines scholarly respect with accessible translation positioning Murdoch authoritatively while Mason guides interpretation. M-and-D receives vivid development making abstract concepts concrete. Rhetorical questions engage readers directly. Conclusion offers practical encouragement acknowledging “no quick fixes” while suggesting cultivation remains achievable.
Key Terms
Vocabulary from the Article
Click each card to reveal the definition
Build your vocabulary systematically
Each article in our course includes 8-12 vocabulary words with contextual usage.
Tough Words
Challenging Vocabulary
Tap each card to flip and see the definition
Peculiar or individual in character or manner; distinctive to a particular person; characteristic of one person’s unique way of behaving or thinking rather than following general patterns.
“Love, on the other hand (whether romantic, familial, or love of friends) seems unpredictable, idiosyncratic and unique.”
Unfair bias in favor of one thing or person compared with another; tendency to favor particular individuals or groups; preference or special treatment not given to others.
“At worst, the partiality that seems central to love can seem to conflict with the impartiality that seems to characterise ethics.”
Results in or leads to a particular outcome; occurs as a consequence or end result; comes about or happens eventually.
“Thinking about others in a hostile and condescending way is morally significant even if it never eventuates in outward action.”
Making oneself appear greater, more important, or more powerful than one actually is; enhancing one’s own status, reputation, or power through exaggeration or false claims.
“The chief enemy of excellence in morality (and also in art) is personal fantasy: the tissue of self-aggrandising and consoling wishes and dreams which prevents one from seeing what is there outside one.”
In psychoanalytic context: personally-specific concerns, anxieties, or fears shaping individual’s perception and behavior; psychological conflicts or patterns influencing how one sees and responds to reality.
“M’s caricature of D depended both on unjust social conventions, and on more individual or personally specific concerns M had (her ‘neuroses’).”
Just begun and not yet fully formed or developed; rudimentary or imperfectly formed; existing as vague awareness or understanding not yet fully articulated or realized.
“Very often, we may be prompted to attend to others by our dim awareness that we are judging others harshly or failing to do justice to them… This kind of inchoate recognition of our failures regarding others is common.”
Reading Comprehension
Test Your Understanding
5 questions covering different RC question types
1According to Murdoch’s philosophy as explained by Mason, the mother-in-law M’s hostile vision of daughter-in-law D constitutes a genuine moral failing even though M behaves outwardly beautifully toward D and never expresses her disdain.
2According to Murdoch’s philosophy, what are the two key elements (convention and neurosis) that shape M’s distorted fantasy vision of D?
3Which sentence best captures Murdoch’s explanation of how loving attention enables liberation from ego-driven fantasy?
4Evaluate these statements about Murdoch’s reconceptualization of morality’s core:
Murdoch argues morality’s core is vision—”the way we see the world”—rather than Kantian choice, making attention (Simone Weil’s concept) rather than decision the key moral activity.
The ego according to Murdoch facilitates true seeing by drawing attention outward toward reality and helping us recognize others as sources of value in their own right.
When M lovingly attends to D after reflecting on her snobbery and jealousy, her vision transforms: D becomes “refreshingly simple” rather than vulgar, “spontaneous” rather than undignified, “pleasantly youthful” rather than irritatingly childish.
Select True or False for all three statements, then click “Check Answers”
5What can be inferred about why Mason suggests engaging with art, skill, and craft can help cultivate the attentive love Murdoch advocates?
FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions
Mason explains Murdoch adopts the concept from “activist, mystic and philosopher Simone Weil,” positioning attention as “the key moral activity” rather than choice or decision. This isn’t ordinary noticing but “a kind of just, patient, generous attention to others”—loving attention drawing us outward from ego-centered concerns toward reality. Ordinary attention can still be ego-distorted (M initially “attends” to D but through fantasy), while Murdochian attention specifically means “setting the ego aside and really coming to grasp the reality of another individual.” The distinction involves quality not just quantity: attending carefully, patiently, generously requires caring about things “for their own sake” rather than relation to our concerns. This transforms attention from passive perception to active moral practice—continuous vision-building either creating fairer, just pictures or distorting reality. Understanding Weil’s influence matters because it connects Murdoch to mystical traditions emphasizing contemplation, suggesting moral perception requires spiritual-like discipline beyond intellectual understanding.
Mason writes: “Murdoch thus embraces the forceful aspect of love, its ability to overcome us. Love needs to be a powerful force, she suggests, in order to overcome the strong pull that fantasising has for us. We are strongly motivated to fantasise because doing so speaks to our deep egocentric needs and wishes. But love is a powerful-enough force that is able to overcome this, able to draw us out of ourselves and towards reality.” The ego’s fantasies possess “great power over us” precisely because “they speak so strongly to our egos”—protecting ourselves by seeing only what we wish, ignoring inconvenient truths, distorting what threatens self-image. Mason explains convention and neurosis “combine… to create images that have great power over us. Since they speak so strongly to our egos, we are resistant to amending or displacing them.” Against this entrenched resistance, only equally powerful counter-force—love’s capacity to draw us irresistibly outward—can succeed. This explains why Murdoch emphasizes love specifically rather than mere rational reflection or willpower: overcoming ego requires force matching ego’s strength.
Mason quotes Murdoch: “The chief enemy of excellence in morality (and also in art) is personal fantasy: the tissue of self-aggrandising and consoling wishes and dreams which prevents one from seeing what is there outside one.” Fantasy constructs reality serving ego’s needs—”self-aggrandising” (making ourselves feel important/superior) and “consoling” (protecting from painful truths). M’s fantasy presents D as “common, unpolished, lacking dignity”—this reflects M’s concerns (maintaining class superiority, protecting self-image as refined person, managing jealousy at displacement) rather than D’s actual character. The ego “ignores or distorts anything not directly relevant to the self or inconvenient to it, even at the cost of losing one’s grasp of reality.” Fantasy becomes elaborate self-deception: M genuinely sees D as vulgar because this vision serves multiple ego-needs simultaneously. Mason notes “much of our ordinary vision is like this”—not just extreme cases like conspiracy theories but everyday resentments coloring perception. The key insight: what we take as objective perception often reflects subjective ego-driven construction, making “seeing what is there outside one” surprisingly difficult moral achievement.
Readlite provides curated articles with comprehensive analysis including summaries, key points, vocabulary building, and practice questions across 9 different RC question types. Our Ultimate Reading Course offers 365 articles with 2,400+ questions to systematically improve your reading comprehension skills.
This is an Advanced-level philosophical exposition requiring sophisticated comprehension across multiple dimensions: understanding philosophical frameworks’ contrasts (Kantian duty-based ethics versus Murdochian vision-centered ethics), tracking conceptual distinctions (ordinary attention versus Murdochian loving attention, healthy versus defective love, convention versus neurosis shaping fantasy), following extended examples demonstrating abstract principles (M-and-D illustrating vision’s moral significance and transformation through loving attention), synthesizing influences (Simone Weil’s attention, Freudian ego analysis, religious traditions’ love-centrality), and grasping philosophical methodology (using vivid examples to challenge common-sense assumptions about morality’s location in choice rather than perception). Success requires comfort with abstract ethical theory, ability to see how examples illuminate general principles rather than merely instantiating them, understanding why seemingly radical reconceptualizations (vision not choice as morality’s core) solve genuine philosophical problems (explaining moral significance of hostile thoughts never acted upon), and capacity for self-reflective application (recognizing own ego-driven fantasies in everyday perception). The essay presumes educated general readership interested in ethics and capable of following philosophical argumentation without requiring specialized training, making sophisticated ideas accessible through pedagogical clarity while maintaining conceptual rigor necessary for genuine engagement with Murdochian philosophy.
Mason addresses this concern: “This might seem to capture some kinds of love, but we might wonder whether it captures them all. Can’t love be dangerous and misleading?” Murdoch allows ordinary human love often falls short—Romeo initially loving Rosaline before instantly forgetting her for Juliet exemplifies love leading astray. However, “she insists, when love leads us astray, this is because something that properly aims at a real person has instead taken as its object an illusion, something that falls short of its own true aim. Love that is morally misleading is (though perhaps common) itself a defective, or at least imperfect, form of love. Attentive love, by contrast, represents the ideal of love.” The distinction turns on object: defective love takes illusions/fantasies as objects (D’s husband projecting “feminine stereotypes onto her” responding “positively to D as a result of this fantasy” rather than knowing/understanding her), while attentive love engages actual persons. Mason concludes: “For Murdoch, real love is a way of actually engaging with another, not merely with an illusion. A love that fails to attend to the other is a failure of love.” This reframes misleading love not as contradicting Murdoch’s thesis but confirming it—love’s moral power depends on genuinely seeing others rather than ego-projected fantasies.
The Ultimate Reading Course covers 9 RC question types: Multiple Choice, True/False, Multi-Statement T/F, Text Highlight, Fill in the Blanks, Matching, Sequencing, Error Spotting, and Short Answer. This comprehensive coverage prepares you for any reading comprehension format you might encounter.
