Toward a “strong” normativity of fear in Hans Jonas and Aristotle

Abstract What does it mean to say that one “ought” to undergo an emotion? In The Imperative of Responsibility , Hans Jonas provocatively asserts that twentieth‐century citizens “ought” to fear for the well‐being of future generations. I argue that Jonas's demand is not straightforwardly reducible to claims about the fittingness, expedience, or aretaic desirability of fear, and I present an interpretation of its content and coherence using Aristotle's moral psychology of fear in the Rhetoric , Politics , and Nicomachean Ethics as a framework. Aristotle's account of fear as an anticipatory, imaginative stance that alters perception and judgment helps to clarify that Jonas's demand concerns acts of affect‐laden, imaginative reflection through which one might revise one's affective sensibilities with regard to future persons. I conclude by considering several objections to Jonas's first‐order argument, and indicating several clarifications and caveats that are important for formulating strong normative assertions about political emotions more generally.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
The Southern Journal of Philosophy
Published
2025-05-19
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/sjp.12631
Primary Topic
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Toward a “strong” normativity of fear in Hans Jonas and Aristotle

Magnus Ferguson
The Southern Journal of Philosophy
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
article

Toward a “strong” normativity of fear in Hans Jonas and Aristotle

Magnus Ferguson
article en

Abstract

Abstract What does it mean to say that one “ought” to undergo an emotion? In The Imperative of Responsibility , Hans Jonas provocatively asserts that twentieth‐century citizens “ought” to fear for the well‐being of future generations. I argue that Jonas's demand is not straightforwardly reducible to claims about the fittingness, expedience, or aretaic desirability of fear, and I present an interpretation of its content and coherence using Aristotle's moral psychology of fear in the Rhetoric , Politics , and Nicomachean Ethics as a framework. Aristotle's account of fear as an anticipatory, imaginative stance that alters perception and judgment helps to clarify that Jonas's demand concerns acts of affect‐laden, imaginative reflection through which one might revise one's affective sensibilities with regard to future persons. I conclude by considering several objections to Jonas's first‐order argument, and indicating several clarifications and caveats that are important for formulating strong normative assertions about political emotions more generally.

The Southern Journal of Philosophy
University of Chicago (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Psychology of Moral and Emotional Judgment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.