How to Feel About Climate Change? An Analysis of the Normativity of Climate Emotions

Abstract

Climate change evokes different emotions in people. Recently, climate emotions have become a matter of normative scrutiny in the public debate. This phenomenon, which we refer to as the normativization of climate emotions, manifests at two levels. At the individual level, people are faced with affective dilemmas, situations where they are genuinely uncertain about what is the right way to feel in the face of climate change. At the collective level, the public debate reflects disagreement about which climate emotions are appropriate to feel. The aim of this paper is to examine the normative reasons in favour of different climate emotions by combining normative criteria from philosophy and psychology. We conclude that these criteria provide partial reasons for or against different climate. Emotional disagreement in climate contexts may generate

Ecological Grief Observed from a Distance

“…Some grieve after witnessing a polluted river; some after witnessing starving stray dogs fighting for pieces of plastic to eat; some after realising that their children will have less snow and winter fun in their lives; some grieve directly for the loss of what the trigger situation is about; some come to realise, through their response, something more systemic or indirect and grieve for that. And yet, all this variety is apparently well compatible with the fact that ecological emotions are regularly and probably plausibly approached as such that can be judged as justified or less justified [32]. (And they mostly are justified.)…”

“…My take on ecological grief can thus be summed up as follows: the motives we have for how we feel (or simply the "why" of why we feel how we feel) can be reconstructed as reasons-and by "reconstructed" I do not mean "fabricated" 3 -in the light of which how we feel plausibly appears as more or less justified, to an open range of observers, including both the first person and third parties [37]. This kind of evaluative assessment is increasingly applied to environmental emotions [32]. The weight of these reasons can vary quite fluidly from person to person.…”

Climate Change and the Motivational Gap

“…Most of them are framed as healthy reactions vis à vis threats and loss, and only the strongest forms of them are to be considered from a pathological point of view. A general overview may address this ideal type as a complex system of "coping and changing" (Pihkala, 2022), including at least three major dimensions -"action," "grieving" (or "emotional engagement"), and "distancing" (Reser & Swim, 2011, p. 112;Mosquera & Jylhä, 2022).…”

“…Grieving (and other emotional engagements gathered under this label) refers to the need to tackle changes and losses by experiencing individual emotional reactions or by putting in place practices of sharing feelings not only of sadness, but also of eco-guilt, gratitude or/and anger, meeting with people in specific or symbolic date or place of remembrance, writing and sharing notes about one's feelings, and so on (Norgaard, 2011;Pihkala, 2021). Grieving may also give shape to ethical tasks, by encouraging the sharing of positive engaging emotions (Mosquera & Jylhä, 2022;Solomon, 2004). Problems may raise when this behavioral domain becomes too intense or overwhelming in an individual everyday life, up to strongly marginalizing the other two dimensions within the schema above proposed.…”

Ecological Sorrow: Types of Grief and Loss in Ecological Grief

“…This issue is related to normativity of eco-emotions and climate emotions e.g. [9,184]. Certain "affective displays" and "grieving rules" [156] of ecological grief can be supported and others disenfranchised.…”