Session 4B: Hope, Despair and Evil

Session 4B: Hope, Despair and Evil
Chair: Mauro Dujmovic

Pedagogy of the Hope-Possessed: Kierkegaard and Ricoeur on Hope over Despair in the University
Rachel I. Waterstradt
LMU Department of Philosophy, Los Angeles, CA, USA

No abstract is presently available

Though Gabriel Marcel and William James both developed a theory of hope, the close affinity between the philosophies of these two thinkers has often been overlooked. As I will show in this paper, the existential perspective presented by Marcel and the pragmatist point of view as described by James complement and illuminate each other, and a comparison between the two leads to a philosophically profound approach to, and description of, hope.
The paper will center around two distinctions and one opposition. First, the distinction between hope and optimism. Both philosophers have been mistaken for optimists, whereas in fact both emphasize that hope differs from optimism because it requires a constant and difficult effort. Second, the opposition between hope and despair centers around the question if and how one can escape from despair (or anhedonia, as James sometimes calls it). In this context the existential state of despair will be discussed in connection to what James calls the sick soul. Third, the distinction between hope and desire will help clarify a possible origin of despair. Whereas hope involves a courageous openness to and active acceptance of vagueness (James) and mystery (Marcel), desire is focused on a particular outcome to be achieved. Despair is often the result of frustrated desire, because with the loss of the thing desired, nothing else appears worthwhile or meaningful. Together these distinctions show that hope is difficult and requires a constant effort not to reduce mysteries (such as the future) to problems to which one cannot help but desiring a well-described solution, thereby inviting the despair which ultimately results from this lack of openness. In conclusion, the attitude that marks James’s “tough-minded, empiricist temperament” will be shown to be the appropriate response to Marcel’s “exigency of being,” the demand that mystery is respected.

Download Conference Paper –

What is hope really? That’s a philosophical question which requires a philosophical answer. So, what should someone use as a philosophical method, in order to define hope? My opinion is that only phenomenology could explain a hopeful attitude or mood. Besides, it is obvious that hope refers to human consciousness as well as to sentiments or feelings of a certain kind.
The questions I am going to deal with, are as follows. Can we say that “man hopes” in the same way that Spinoza asserts “homo cogitat”? Is this an attitude shared by all, or, rather, is there a difference between those people who seem to be more hopeful and some others who seem to be lacking in hope? Is hope a “normal” sentiment or one that occurs only in an “emergency”?  Is hope a good or a bad feeling? Nikos Kazantzakis, a modern Greek philosopher, used to say “I don’t hope anything. I don’t fear anything. I’m free.” Spinoza, also, places hope amongst negative feelings, because it goes together with fear. But, these are particular philosophical approaches to hope from a certain philosophical or theoretical point of view. They also seem to contradict common sense, from the point of view that hope is recognized as a positive emotion. But, what matters for me here is our being able to understand the psychological nature of hope.
In my opinion, if we are to define some positive characteristics of hope, we have to be able to justify hope philosophically. So, I’m convinced that hope is a positive sentiment because hope always has to do with the concept of good, while evil amounts to hopelessness. Good is always hopeful. The notion of hope is a way to introduce the thought of good, and the thought of good contains the notion of hope. Bad feelings exclude hope. Evil feelings contain the will for a certain purpose to be fulfilled, always fearing failure, and not being able to feel hope.
Obviously, this idea of mine seems to support the religious meaning of hope, although it is not my intention. Regarding the notions of good and evil, I do not disregard Nietzsche’s attitude towards this distinction, but, with Alain Badiou, I recognize the need to keep this distinction philosophically alive. I also recognize behind the “Kids at Hope Programs” (see Christine R. Tipps) the conviction that hope is a positive power.

Download Conference Paper –