Advertisement

Which Void? (MGM Chapter 18)

  • Nora Hämäläinen
Chapter

Abstract

In Chapter 18 of Murdoch’s Metaphysics as a Guide to Morals the concept of ‘void’ is offered as a label for a fourth dimension of moral thought, after ‘axioms, duties and Eros’ in the preceding chapter. Void, unlike the others, does not provide a mode of structuring a normative conception of some area or aspect of the moral life. It is rather described as a ‘tract of experience’—of evil, darkness, desolation, hopelessness, pain—offered as an antidote to overly optimistic readings of her ethics of Eros. Murdoch draws heavily on Simone Weil’s work here, but a closer look at the chapter discloses a dissonance in her use of ‘void’, which in turn reveals a difference between these two thinkers.

References

  1. Antonaccio, M. 2012. A philosophy to live by. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bronzo, S., and Diamond, C. 2013. Philosophy in a realistic spirit: An interview. Iride: Filosofia e discussione pubblica 26 (2): 239–282.Google Scholar
  3. Clarke, B. 2012. Iris Murdoch and the prospects for critical moral perception. In Iris Murdoch: Philosopher, ed. Justin Broackes, 227–253. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Conradi, P. 2001. The saint and the artist. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  5. Conradi, P. 2002. Iris Murdoch: A life. London: HarperCollins.Google Scholar
  6. Hämäläinen, N. 2015. Reduce ourselves to zero?: Sabina Lovibond, Iris Murdoch, and feminism. Hypatia 30 (4): 743–759.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Larson, K. 2009. Everything important is to do with passion. Dissertation, Uppsala University, Uppsala.Google Scholar
  8. Larson, K. 2014. The most intimate bond: Metaxological thinking in Iris Murdoch and Simone Weil. In Iris Murdoch connected: Critical essays on her fiction and philosophy, ed. Mark Luprech, 153–168. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
  9. Lovibond, S. 2011. Iris Murdoch, gender and philosophy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Mulhall, S. 1997. Constructing a hall of reflection: Perfectionist edification in Iris Murdoch’s Metaphysics as a guide to morals. Philosophy 72 (280): 219–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mulhall, S. 2007. ‘All the world must be “religious”’: Iris Murdoch’s ontological arguments. In Iris Murdoch: A reassessment, ed. Anne Rowe, 23–34. Houndmills, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Murdoch, I. 1992. Metaphysics as a guide to morals (Abbreviated MGM). London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  13. Murdoch, I. 1997. Existentialists and mystics. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
  14. Nietzsche, F. 1994. On the genealogy of morality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Robjant, D. 2013. Symposium on Iris Murdoch: How miserable we are, how wicked; into the ‘Void’ with Murdoch, Mulhall, and Antonaccio. Heythrop Journal 54: 999–1006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Weil, S. 2002. Gravity and Grace. London: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nora Hämäläinen
    • 1
  1. 1.University of PardubicePardubiceCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations