by Rachel Ding’26
After Evening Chapel on January 30th, Rev. Talcott’s sermon on the intersection between love and relationships inspired introspection into and appreciation for the relationships in our homes and at St. Mark’s. According to twentieth-century philosopher Martin Buber, our approach to any relationship—platonic, familial, or romantic—can be characterized as either “I-Thou” or “I-It.” In the preceding relationship, an individual can recognize the inherent value of the other as a whole being. Both members experience a mutual sense of connection, respect, and engagement. Conversely, an "I-It" relationship involves a more instrumental and transactional approach. An individual treats the other as an object, where one perceives the other as something to be used, manipulated, or controlled for personal gain. There's a sense of detachment and objectification, thereby leading to a superficial connection.
At a glance, the main takeaway from the sermon seems to encourage “I-Thou” relationships and discourage “I-It” relationships. However, I encourage you to develop your own opinions before taking this as the complete truth. Ask yourself the following questions—I have included some situations that disprove what is widely accepted to sort of play devil's advocate.
Are there situations where approaching a relationship with a more transactional mindset (I-It) could be beneficial or pragmatic?
a. In group projects or task-oriented collaboration, adopting an "I-It" approach with the understanding that the relationship focuses on completing tasks rather than deep personal connections might boost efficiency in achieving a common objective.
How do "I-It" relationships foster mutual benefit, where both parties may derive satisfaction from the exchange?
a. In "I-It" relationships, clear expectations and boundaries are oftentimes established from the outset. Both parties understand their roles and responsibilities within the interaction, leading to more efficiency in achieving desired outcomes. By focusing on the transactional aspects of the interaction, both parties can maximize their time and resources, leading to a more productive exchange.
Can the exclusivity and intensity of "I-Thou" relationships inadvertently lead to feelings of isolation from other social connections?
a. "I-Thou" relationships often require significant time, energy, and emotional investment. As individuals become deeply involved with one another, they may prioritize the needs of the other person above other social connections. Furthermore, these relationships are more exclusive, as individuals form deep connections with only a few people. While this exclusivity can strengthen the bond between individuals within the relationship, it may also inadvertently cause them to neglect or distance themselves from those not part of the inner circle.
Can the depth and intensity of an "I-Thou" relationship cause emotional dependency? How do these dynamics affect your sense of autonomy within the relationship?
a. In an "I-Thou" relationship, emotional dependency can develop when individuals rely heavily on their partner/friend to meet their emotional needs and provide a sense of security and validation. This reliance may lead to a diminished sense of self as individuals prioritize the other person's needs and interests over their own.
b. Emotional dependency can also contribute to a loss of individual identity within the relationship. Individuals may become so immersed in their connection that they struggle to differentiate their thoughts and feelings from those of the other person. This blurring of boundaries can weaken their sense of autonomy and independence. Emotional dependency often coexists with a fear of separation or abandonment. Individuals may go to great lengths to avoid disagreement, fearing it will jeopardize their connection and lead to rejection.
At the end of the day, relationships aren't black and white. The significance of human connections lies in their complexity and diversity. While "I-Thou" relationships promote genuine connection, "I-It" relationships can serve practical purposes. We can take insight from philosophers like Martin Buber, but ultimately, how we interpret and apply these beliefs lie in our hands—our experiences shape how we navigate these relationships. By embracing the nuances of each relationship and seeing it through different perspectives, we foster interactions that transcend categorizations.