Vision and Encounter in Moral Thinking (MGM Chapter 15)

  • Christopher Cordner


Iris Murdoch thinks that ‘the activity and imagery of vision is at the centre of human consciousness’, ever re-orienting us to ‘reflection, reverence, respect’ for reality. Murdoch believes that Buber’s emphasis on the ‘I-Thou’ relation conflicts with this morally re-orienting power of the visual. Buber thinks that his language of encounter and dialogue makes space for the moral challenge of the other, and for growth, movement, creative response in human life, in a way shouldered out by ‘visual metaphysics’. Murdoch’s privileging of ‘the visual’ is a source of her moral objections to Buber’s I-Thou God, and of her objections to his language of encounter and dialogue more generally. I mount various criticisms of Murdoch’s championing of the visual and of her broader critique of Buber.



My thanks to Hugo Strandberg for helpful comments on an earlier draft.


  1. Berenson, B. 1896. The Florentine painters of the Renaissance. New York and London: G.P. Putnam’s Sons.Google Scholar
  2. Buber, M. 1953. Eclipse of God. London: Victor Gollancz.Google Scholar
  3. Buber, M. 1970. I and Thou. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons.Google Scholar
  4. Bugbee, H. 1999. The inward morning. Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press.Google Scholar
  5. Collingwood, R.G. 1938. The principles of art. London: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Merleau-Ponty, M. 1964. Cézanne’s doubt. In Sense and nonsense. Evanston: Northwestern.Google Scholar
  7. Murdoch, I. 1992. Metaphysics as a guide to morals (Abbreviated MGM). London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  8. Murdoch, I. 1997. Existentialists and mystics. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christopher Cordner
    • 1
  1. 1.University of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations