PHIL51 Week 2 - Be able to explain the general debate about climate

PHIL 51—Scientific Reasoning

Week 2

• Be able to explain the general debate about climate emotions that Tolentino, Huber, and Kovaka and Santana discuss in their papers
• Hope and despair.
  • The mainstream account of hope Huber discusses and what he thinks is wrong with it
  • Huber’s own definitions of hope and despair
  • Episodic vs. fundamental vs. resignative despair
  • Huber’s conditions on justified hope
  • Why he thinks it’s so hard to have justified hope, and the role he thinks despair can play in helping us to have justified hope
    • In particular: the three things that despair can be a guard against
• The ethics of belief. What that term means, and what it has to do with climate emotions.
• Inductive risk.
  • Be able to explain the concept and be able to give an example of a situation where someone is facing inductive risk
  • Be able to explain how Kovaka and Santana say we should decide what to believe when we are in a situation of inductive risk
• Be able to explain what Kovaka and Santana say the two main upshots of the inductive risk analysis are for the debate about climate emotions