Hope from Despair ^*

The public discourse on climate change has long centred around hope-based narratives pushed by both the media and mainstream environmentalist agents from Greenpeace WWF to Bill Gates Al Gore.11 Most recently, see for instance 2021. promises of scientific technological advance in particular, they argue, give us reason be hopeful that it is our hands halt incipient catastrophe. We just need roll up sleeves get with it. In face humanity’s apparent inability—on display most recently at COP26 Glasgow—to adopt ‘rapid far-reaching changes all aspects society’ required least keep average global temperature increases below 1.5°C,22 IPCC 2018. this narrative come under pressure. More radical activists make case an affective shift away hope warming towards darker attitudes such as anger, panic, or fear, or, surprisingly perhaps, despair. activist group Extinction Rebellion (XR) arguably been vocal their call ‘die’.33 Greta Thunberg (2019) famously encapsulated sentiment her Davos speech: ‘I don’t want you hopeful. I panic. feel fear every day. And then act.’ Hope, worry, obscures truth about single largest existential threat planet hampers kind action would rein its consequences. ‘In facing predicament’, ‘there no way escape despair'.44 2019, p. 13. notion ‘climate despair’ used far back Pooley 2010, but only gained prominence. Reactions have mixed, within beyond movement. While some fellow express enthusiasm explicit invocation despair,55 Hine 11. others worry potentially stifling depoliticizing effects public. According American scientist Michael Mann, rhetoric despair ‘is many ways pernicious outright denial, leads down same path inaction’;66 Mann 2017. writer George Monbiot even considers succumbing a moral failure.77 2019. media, XR are frequently portrayed ‘eccentric dangerous merchants despair’.88 Harris 2020. This discursive backlash chimes philosophical scepticism widespread long-standing. Euripides’ Amphitryon, ‘mark worthless man’;99 Euripides, Heracles, 105–6, cited Cairns Aquinas ‘the greatest sins’;1010 1923, Qu. 20, Art. 3. Kant’s we might ‘succumb obligation;1111 Kant 1996, 8: 309. Charles Peirce equates insanity.1212 1992, 405. contemporary philosophers juxtapose celebratory accounts motivation source grit view unproductive, impotent, nihilistic. Despairing agents, should either relevant end cultivate attitude, hope, strengthens resolve rather than undermining it.1313 E.g., Han-Pile Stern forthcoming. Unsurprisingly, political tend agree ‘a politics, one based upon vision generalized prosperity sustainability, best addresses problems change’.1414 Moellendorf 2021a, xxi. aim article withstand wholehearted rejection alike. shall argue specific form episodic important role play practical particularly lives.1515 Hope itself attracted attention (e.g., Howard 2021; Stockdale 2021). For overview, Blöser et al. guarding against certain pitfalls false can help (and ultimately act) well. Against background, propose understand not asking reject aspiring more robust realistic which arises Before good idea, conceptual ground-clearing order. start defining contrast, yet closely related, (Section I). An agent who experiences unable imaginatively close gap between themselves desired future, unlikeliness outcome, possibility, salient. Section II, rational justified requires complex trade-off various epistemic considerations often difficult precisely stance. There thus inherent risk will degenerate into wishful thinking, complacency, fixation. III, draw claims statements members (as well activists) order illustrate how guard these dangers. As deliberative corrective, realistically assess empirical circumstances (III.A), act courageous creative (III.B), critically reflect ends available alternatives (III.C). However, persists resulting new different kinds fatal, too IV): destroying basic underlying sense future open intervention (our fundamental hope), undermines agency such. Hence careful off each other. Despair received much Western philosophy, broadly analytic tradition; details therefore remain underexplored.1616 Milona 2020, 100. Some exceptions Steinbock 2007; Govier 2011; Ratcliffe 2013; Calhoun Wherever mentioned, scolded rejected. present section, take my cue burgeoning debates nature grip usually thought antidote: Given multifaceted plays lives, hardly surprising struggle provide unified definition phenomenon. so-called ‘orthodox definition’,1717 Martin 2014, 211; originally Downie 1963. compound state combines desire p belief, presupposition, possible certain.1818 On question whether belief lack impossibility, Chignell 2022, 4. Hope’s cognitive element distinguishes modally less constrained wishes hand (I wish, though fly simply flapping arms) confident expectations Its conative captures fact hoping person takes pro-attitude hoped-for object. It may superficial mundane hopes defined along lines: instance, there apple pie dessert train arrive time. orthodox cannot account complete paradigmatic form, sometimes referred ‘substantial hope’,1919 Pettit 2004, pp. 157?9; also 2018, 84?9; refers ‘hope hope’. where stakes high, probability low: recovery serious illness successful career academia. These command attention, playing prominent structuring shaping thoughts actions, go mere belief-desire combination. problem comes fore clearly definition’s inability distinguish Notice two people equally outcome believe possibility nonetheless differ regard outlook. Take Luc Bovens’s by-now iconic example (based Frank Darabont’s film Shawshank Redemption) Andy Red, prisoners serving life sentence murder.2020 Bovens 1999, 668?9. They free (small) chance able escape. Yet, while out, Red despairs low odds. recent debate focused identifying third component (in addition desire) allow Instead committing among countless proposals,2121 Ibid.; 2004; Meirav 2009; 2014; Kwong name few. like crystallize what shared idea them: despairing relate to, ‘attend to’,2222 2022. ‘perceive’2323 2021, 16?20. outcome. latter looks situation says, grant possible, thousand!’, former thousand, possible!’.2424 2009, 222?3. seems salient foreground, unlikeliness. imagination appears crucial explaining gestalt shift.2525 44. Bovens, ‘mentally image’ if world were materialize.2626 674. Cheshire include ‘phenomenological determinate whose content includes success’, is, ‘we previsage particular imagination’.2727 72. explicitly, Jack argues able, exercising creativity imagination, (that visualize mind) about, she sees genuine possibility.2828 that, contrast authors, involvement constitutive account. foreground; typically (though necessarily) matter imagination. framework allows define (substantial) hope. Like agent, however, mentally visualizing there. helps why, cases attainment object depends own contribution (which primarily concerned with),2929 (2018, 6) ‘practical sustain now called ‘grit’,3030 Rioux agent’s ability inhabit project stabilizes structures connection By because forward disposed sense, conceive mutually exclusive antagonists,3131 rules out despair, other emotions (Stockdale 2019), pessimism. If pessimistic expect about: i.e., consider likelihood <.5 (e.g. 724). hold (given foreground). corollary, pessimism tame dangers discuss below. am grateful anonymous reviewer urging me clarify. jointly exhaustive. high-stakes scenarios mind, necessarily attend way—mental abstention option. words, perspective mind develop tonic (thereby) warranted add myself episodic. do so demarcate refer detail IV) despair: general hopelessness, lost conceived already determined. Along lines, Anthony describes ‘utter loss any ground hope’, ‘experience abandonment ultimate decisive’.3232 2007, 446?7. Episodic differs propositional intentional—we over something—but leaves regaining redirecting point. For, experience time, differing relates unlikely Indeed, find oscillating two—depending whether, moment, foreground. resignative affairs combined impossible. discussions Stern, keeps desiring without being bring think unobtainable, obtain own’.3333 See Kretz Vice Despair, view, experienced painful longing impossible goes frustration inner conflict. quite plausibly irrational; was sea bass favourite restaurant, turns none market today, consistency) something else.3434 retains irrational. That, course, what, any, value lives. To answer question, turn norms. provided antonym presently foreground possibility. My claim remainder well: hope.3535 Following McCormick (2017, 131), use terms interchangeably, capturing difference badly. prepare argument, first explain means with, obvious mental responsive reasons assessment place. fact, history passion affect hence fundamentally noncognitive. At point, suffice point communicative practices highly evaluative: ask laud ‘courageous’ ‘resilient’ hopes, criticize ‘careless’ ‘empty’ hopes.3636 2017, 131. say deliberate justification rationality does commit ourselves circumstances.3737 (2014, 67) uphold conceptualizing thereby ‘it … adopt, relinquish, revise, maintain direct result deliberation doing so’. shares feature anger,3838 Srinivasan 127 n. 19. fitting apt independently voluntary control. investigating norms observation made preceding section representing desirable, contains elements. From follows subject concern component: epistemically justified, must believing neither nor certain. suggest though, threshold That say, per se irrational misplaced outcomes unlikely.3939 McFall 1991; 376 2. evidence indicating reach gives still warrant things considered—for invested it,4040 (2018) (2017) disagree demand evidential support lessens when important, life-structuring hopes. muster little energy, alternatives. opportunity costs low. Hence, matters assessment.4141 678?80; 53. prisoner (see above) his odds succeeding given evidence. Darrel calls pragmatic approach standards according ‘different factual depending circumstances, those depend sort pragmatic, cost/benefit, calculation regarding hoping’.4242 2021b, 6?7. domain, strategic hand, commits goodness object, demands morality (whatever taken be). bad immoral. Adapting car-racing enthusiast secret witness accident happen: (on ‘devot[e] energy occur stories tell friends, etc.’.4343 679. When norms, further questions. First, makes (permissible) likely. Ideally, motivates pursuits prospects success dim.4444 presupposes accurate understanding relation external luck, environmental conditions, people. (of interested in) characterized distinct combination vulnerability. contribution, fully hands: could hoping, ‘actively engag[e] current limitations affecting inhabit’.4545 McGeer 104. Justified successfully navigates tension, overestimating power overly relying factors leave Importantly, second set concerns conduciveness generally; securing, selecting ends. context, costs. invest forgo lose sight alternative paths. ‘imagine attainable, modest, real reforms planning building better thorough-going, likely, change’.4646 7. respect, benefits outweigh costs.4747 referee suggested further, ‘affective’, costs, rule incompatible emotions. Here, focus attaining ourselves. aware ‘what lost’ constantly monitor wider landscape including sum up, (1) estimate, (2) realize end, (3) advances generally. Hoping well, constant triangulation ourselves, ends, circumstances. Now, somewhat paradoxically, stance itself. essentially focusing zooming (the of) outcome—of blinding detrimental zoom align considerations. why hope: wrongly estimate likeliness rely factors, blind alternative, goals. show next function corrective guards conjunction, Sections (concerning hope) II yield predicament: complicate needed read XR’s responding predicament. fixation—three forms expressions diagnose crisis. Ultimately, One central finally ‘tell truth!’4848 2021a. change. Activists underestimate magnitude and, consequence, overestimate solving founder Roger Hallam, main activism rarely seem talk reality (i.e. latest science) aren’t desperate actually is.4949 Hallam What he alludes denial; denies geophysical facts anthropogenic warming, largely unconscious denial refuses accept process dire really is. ‘come knowing’ deeper level.5050 61. craving optimistic change,5151 Solnit them ‘stop pretending’5252 2019; Franzen currently headed mass extinction. Arguably, saying appropriate circumstances—if properly attended evidence, prospect averting doing, acknowledge facts. Derrick Jensen puts it, ‘despair entirely response situation’.5353 2006, 5. sit uncomfortably remarks above Adverse surely difficult, psychology, bigger. Yet denied contained appropriately reflects aspect namely prevent seeing clearly. A discourse, shades put Nancy Snow,5454 Snow 2013. virtue facilitates intellectual flourishing variety ways. Snow, pursue goal place (for example, acquiring knowledge world), equip resilience, perseverance, flexibility, openness essential achievement lacks disposition resign enquiry quickly understanding. XR, highlight side right instances, recognize represent vice hinders so. Aaron Cobb argues, create dispositions threaten capacity engage responsible inquiry’, ignore fail impossible’.5555 2015, 270. Why so? imaginative activity involved primary culprit.5656 678. Specifically, visualization may, were, ‘bleed into’ perception reality, obfuscating distinction critical beliefs basis explains bias, be. Their thinking (if raise warranted) ungrounded optimism mistakenly conclude probable possible).5757 Eagleton 2015. way. despairing, recall, perspective: predicament blurred lines look sober rose-tinted way—their attuned actual formed consequently realistic. prisoners’ above, Red’s him risks (such challenge surmounting prison’s security regime). He friend, justified. Theodor W. Adorno instructively worries very context. Writing aftermath Holocaust, psychological coping mechanism