Samuel J. Kramer

This article identifies conditions of rationality of radical hope in times of climate crisis, a form of hope that has been described several times as an option to hope realistically in the face of climate crisis. Based on the concern that radical hope as an attitude could be ignorant of concrete possible solutions and in view of competing interpretations of the concept, the relationship between radical hope and hope with a concrete object, also in the context of the climate crisis, is defined in more detail. Radical hope becomes paradigmatically relevant in times of cultural destruction, when many forms of hope with a concrete object have become difficult or impossible, but does not necessarily exclude concrete hopes. Hopes that relate to well-being, games, works of art, or social relationships can potentially remain intact even under circumstances of cultural destruction and exist alongside radical hope as well as in its absence. Radical hope is therefore not the necessary condition for other concrete hopes. It can, however, make certain concrete hopes rationally necessary. This applies to hopes that refer to recognizably necessary or helpful conditions for the success of radical hope. Finally, it is described how rational radical hope must develop over time and become increasingly concrete to represent a practically rational relationship to reality. The requirements of rational radical hope in the context of the climate crisis are identified. The description of this dynamic process emphasizes the need to consider both radical and concrete hope in order to effectively manage times of crisis.