Analyzing Hope : The Live Possibility Account
(2020) In European Journal of Philosophy- Abstract
- The orthodox definition of hope suffers from an exclusion problem: it is unable to exclude subjects without hope. In fact, the orthodox definition even allows for despair to be falsely classified as hope. This problem suggests two basic desiderata for a successful analysis of hope; it should solve the exclusion problem, and it should have the resources to explain why, in a given situation, a subject does or does not form a hope. Bearing these desiderata in mind, I assess two recent hope-accounts offered by Jack M. C. Kwong and Cheshire Calhoun. I then offer my own view, which is based on the Jamesian notion of a “live possibility”. I suggest that a possibility needs to reach a certain probability-threshold in order to count as live, and... (More)
- The orthodox definition of hope suffers from an exclusion problem: it is unable to exclude subjects without hope. In fact, the orthodox definition even allows for despair to be falsely classified as hope. This problem suggests two basic desiderata for a successful analysis of hope; it should solve the exclusion problem, and it should have the resources to explain why, in a given situation, a subject does or does not form a hope. Bearing these desiderata in mind, I assess two recent hope-accounts offered by Jack M. C. Kwong and Cheshire Calhoun. I then offer my own view, which is based on the Jamesian notion of a “live possibility”. I suggest that a possibility needs to reach a certain probability-threshold in order to count as live, and according to my account, to hope is to desire the truth of such a live possibility. This view is well equipped to solve the exclusion problem, and it can explain why a subject does or does not hope. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/89d5b982-ae3a-4811-bb34-9f55bf99ccc9
- author
- Palmqvist, Carl-Johan LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2020-07-21
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- in press
- subject
- keywords
- Hope, William James, Possibility
- in
- European Journal of Philosophy
- publisher
- Wiley-Blackwell
- ISSN
- 0966-8373
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- 89d5b982-ae3a-4811-bb34-9f55bf99ccc9
- date added to LUP
- 2020-07-30 09:31:46
- date last changed
- 2020-08-03 13:40:24
@article{89d5b982-ae3a-4811-bb34-9f55bf99ccc9, abstract = {{The orthodox definition of hope suffers from an exclusion problem: it is unable to exclude subjects without hope. In fact, the orthodox definition even allows for despair to be falsely classified as hope. This problem suggests two basic desiderata for a successful analysis of hope; it should solve the exclusion problem, and it should have the resources to explain why, in a given situation, a subject does or does not form a hope. Bearing these desiderata in mind, I assess two recent hope-accounts offered by Jack M. C. Kwong and Cheshire Calhoun. I then offer my own view, which is based on the Jamesian notion of a “live possibility”. I suggest that a possibility needs to reach a certain probability-threshold in order to count as live, and according to my account, to hope is to desire the truth of such a live possibility. This view is well equipped to solve the exclusion problem, and it can explain why a subject does or does not hope.}}, author = {{Palmqvist, Carl-Johan}}, issn = {{0966-8373}}, keywords = {{Hope; William James; Possibility}}, language = {{eng}}, month = {{07}}, publisher = {{Wiley-Blackwell}}, series = {{European Journal of Philosophy}}, title = {{Analyzing Hope : The Live Possibility Account}}, year = {{2020}}, }