Abstract
Abstract
This chapter discusses accounts of hope found in the works of important Enlightenment thinkers: René Descartes, Thomas Hobbes, Baruch de Spinoza, David Hume, and Immanuel Kant. The paper’s guiding questions are: Where are discussions of hope located within these thinkers’ works? Do the authors provide an account of what hope is? Do they ascribe a certain function to hope? Most authors of the Enlightenment, with the exception of Kant, write about hope in the context of a general account of the passions. Their characterization of hope closely resembles the “standard definition” of hope in contemporary debates. According to this definition, hope consists of a desire and a belief in the possibility, but not the certainty, of the desired outcome. It turns out, however, that Descartes, Hobbes, and Hume advocate a stronger evidential condition for hope than is common today: According to their view, we do not hope for what we take to be merely possible, no matter how unlikely it is; we hope for what we take to be more likely. Kant’s account differs from the other ones in important respects: He does not treat hope as an affect and he does not require a probability estimate, but grounds hope in faith.
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Reference25 articles.
1. Blits, J. H. (1989). Hobbesian fear. Political Theory, 17(3), 417–431.
2. Blöser, C. (2020). Hope in Kant. In The moral psychology of hope. Rowman & Littlefield.
3. Bobier, C. A. (2017). Hope and practical deliberation. Analysis, 77(3), 495–497. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/anx102
4. Chignell, A. (2013). Rational hope, moral order, and the revolution of the will. In E. Watkins (Ed.), Divine order, human order, and the order of nature. Oxford University Press.
5. Day, J. P. (1969). Hope. American Philosophical Querterly, 6(2), 89–102.
Cited by
6 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献