Enlightenment views of hope

  • 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 hopeThis 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.show moreshow less

Download full text files

Export metadata

Statistics

Number of document requests

Additional Services

Share in Twitter Search Google Scholar
Metadaten
Author:Claudia BlöserORCiDGND
URN:urn:nbn:de:bvb:384-opus4-1085628
Frontdoor URLhttps://opus.bibliothek.uni-augsburg.de/opus4/108562
ISBN:9783030464882OPAC
ISBN:9783030464899OPAC
Parent Title (English):Historical and multidisciplinary perspectives on hope
Publisher:Springer
Place of publication:Cham
Editor:Steven C. van den Heuvel
Type:Part of a Book
Language:English
Year of first Publication:2020
Publishing Institution:Universität Augsburg
Release Date:2023/10/20
First Page:61
Last Page:76
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46489-9_4
Institutes:Philosophisch-Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät
Philosophisch-Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Philosophie
Philosophisch-Sozialwissenschaftliche Fakultät / Philosophie / Lehrstuhl für Philosophie mit Schwerpunkt Ethik
Dewey Decimal Classification:1 Philosophie und Psychologie / 10 Philosophie / 100 Philosophie und Psychologie
Licence (German):CC-BY 4.0: Creative Commons: Namensnennung (mit Print on Demand)