Hope, Ecological Crises, and Political Theory

Abstract

The role that hope can and should play in responses to ecological crises is a matter of controversy among activists. Some argue that hope plays important motivating role in light of the uncertain possibility of securing a sustainable future, Others argue that given the urgency and extent of the crisis hope seems in appropriate; far more appropriate would be anger or despair. There seem to be different understandings of hope at work in these differing views. Part of what is at stake concerns the nature of hope, in particular whether a readiness to take action, where possible, is constitutive of hope or whether it is basically inert. Hope is standardly understood to be directed at a good end. So, another disagreement has to do with the extent to which a positive end must or should be aimed at in response ecological crises. Activists seem to disagree on the role that a positive vision should play in mobilization efforts. The extent to which hope is a rational response to uncertain goods or averting uncertain threats is also controversial, especially since a hopeful response on behalf of an end entail opportunity costs. In hoping for X, we foreclose other responses, including responses aimed at ends other than X. In tandem with an upsurge of ecological activism, debates regarding the fittingness, rationality, and utility of certain attitudes and responses has arisen. The panel on “Hope, Ecological Crises, and Political Theory” will aiming fostering greater understanding of hope in this context.

Title	Details
Hope, Concrete Utopia, and the Anthropocene	View Paper Details
Eco-Miserabilism and Radical Hope	View Paper Details
"Ecological Activism Between Hope and Eco-Anxiety"	View Paper Details