Explain the general debate about climate emotions that Tolentino, Huber, and Kovaka and Santana discuss in their papers

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