1

Hope pro/contra fear?

Mg.phil.Inga Leitne
Department of Philosophy, Faculty of History and
Philosophy, University of Latvia
Abstract
The main idea of work is to explain origins, main characteristics and
significance of phenomenon of hope and phenomenon of fear. Therefore I
will offer insights in the main characteristics of hope in works of Ernst
Bloch, Gabriel Marcel and Jozef Pieper, etc. In accordance with
philosophers, human being is capable for vital processes that makes
possible the decline of fear and the dawn of hope. For existence of human
being the phenomenon of hope and phenomenon of fear are both
compatible and separable. Therefore the main problem which will be
solved: is hope pro or contra fear? For the explaining of phenomenon of
fear I will offer insight in the works of Martin Heidegger. In accordance
with Ernst Bloch, hope eliminates the fear and therefore seems that hope is
contra fear. From the other side, the hope can be compatible with fear as
the process of gradual eliminating of fear. Therefore both fear and hope is
thinkable together and offers significance one to another. The work of
hope is the process of gradual elimination of fear. Hope can grow stronger
if there are more fear because of elimination process, that is, work of hope.
In this process had to be involved both phenomenons fear and hope.
Therefore in some aspects the hope can depend from fear and the fear can
be thought as provision of emergence and decline of hope. So fear have
double sided significance in the comprehension of the phenomenon of
hope. Hope can be pro and contra fear, because fear provides the hope and
offers significance of hope.
Keywords: phenomenon, hope, fear, phenomenology, human being

XX century is time, when there were many wars and the question
of hopeful anticipations together with fear were widespread. The
philosophers Bloch, Marcel, Pieper and others, comprehended the
phenomenon of hope and recognized it as important for human being. In
the centre of my work are expressions about phenomenon of hope.
2

XX and XXI centuries is time for philosophical reflection with
phenomenological fundament. Act of hoping is significant in lifeworld of
human being. The central point for phenomenological research is inner
expierence of consciousness. Hope is intentional object of human
consciousness. Likewise the other phenomenons of consciousness, XX
century is time for first researches of phenomenology of hope. As argues
Meisenhelder, hope is the phenomenological foundation of both human
life and critical theory. In accordance with Meisenhelder there is necessity
for hopefull social life.
1
The actuality of phenomenology of hope is increasing in the
different kind of conversations about communication, globalization,
multiculturalism processes in the world. For example, in 6th November
2003 in Boston took place International Conference Faith, hope and
phenomenology, the International Conference of Phenomenology with
section about hope in Prag in the year 2002, First Global Conference in
2005 about hope, etc. Important conversations about phenomenon of hope
were in Germany, France, USA, Great Britain, etc.
Firstly about phenomenon of hope. I agree with Schumacher, that
hope is an intentional movement toward a preexistent object.
2
The
object of hope is existent in the not-yet-being. Therefore the object of
hope is not yet possible to reach. Process of hoping is providing vitality
for this intentional object towards which hope is a movement. Not-yet-
being is being, which is not yet reachable as being. It can be being in
future reality. At the same time human being is capable to conceive not-
yet-being as such. For human being not yet being is a part of reality,
which affects all actions and provides existence of human being. Hope as
intentional movement presupposes the hoping human being. This human
being can be characterized as vital process making hoping subject.
Hoping subject can have hope or hopes as such or just participate in
hoping process in which he or she is involved. Human being is capable for
vital processes such as hoping. Bloch argues that hope is only human, not
for animals. Thus for human being act of hoping is great advantage. We
must more and more hope.
The intentionality of hope, directed toward a particular object,
proceeds from a response on the part of the human being to a good that

1
Meisenhelder Thomas, Hope: A Phenomenological Prelude to Critical
Social Theory, Human studies, Jun/Se82, Vol.5, Issue3., 195-212.
2
Schumacher Bernard, Philosophy of Hope. Jozef Pieper and
Contemporary Debates on Hope (USA: Fordham University Press, 2003.),
3

has affected it. The intentional movement is not only the foundation for
the concrete act of hope, but also is in the ontological structure of not-yet-
being.
Human being has to perceive the hoped for object either through
senses or through the intelligence. It can be perceived through both
through senses and intelligence. It seems impossible to hope for something
that one has not already any way perceived.
Every act of hope presupposes the existence of something good,
something the human being is aware of before setting off in its pursuit.
The term good can be understandable very broadly signifying all that
one longs for. Pieper wrotes: Longing, yearning, desiring, wishing,
hungering, and thirsting must all play a role in it; otherwise we do not
speak of hope
3
. According to Pieper: Hope is aimed at being granted
something good and something loved
4
.
The human beings who know a good object through senses or his
intelligence already possesses it in a certain sense, but not yet fully have it
in reality. Having this object as not yet reachable makes hoping process to
start. Thus appears many different kind of hopes. From many disappointed
hopes emerges one hope, which is fundamental and may include partly or
wholly the disapointed hopes. When this fundamental hope is realized,
then other little hopes derive the hoping process from their contents,
which is not fully realized and hoping process continues.
Main characteristics of hope are: (1) hope is accompanied by
minimum of certitude and assurance with respect to the possible possesion
of the thing hoped for, the thing for which the human being aims. If this
minimum is lacking, we are speaking of desire. (2) The object hoped for is
good, understood very broadly - in the ontological sense. The thing must
be good in a certain respect, something desirable for the human being. In
order to be able to speak of hope, there must be an inclination toward the
object, there must be a desire on the part of human being for the object, a
hunger or thirst for the object, which falls under the aspect of goodness.
(3) The object hoped for must be difficult to obtain. We do not hope for
something that demands no effort on the part of the human being. (4) An
object of hope is not something that is necessarily realized. (5) The object
of hope lies beyond the control of the one who hopes. (6) Hope is always

3
Pieper Jozef, Hope and History Five Salzburger Lectures (San Francisco:
Ignatius, 1994.), 20.
4
Ibid, 21.
4

ordered to something that represents a good for the hoping subject. This
aspect of hope consists in the attitude of expectant waiting. Expectant
waiting can be directed either to good or an evil. But hope is hope only if
it is directed to something good.
5
If expectant waiting is directed to evil,
than we are speaking of fear.

Hope is always accompanied by uncertainty. The uncertainty
implies a certain degree of fear. Bloch affirms an opposition between hope
and fear, but Marcel describes the human being as wholly given to fear
only for moments at a time. For Marcel hope is dialogical and enigmatic,
because it includes relationship of I and Other. Marcel argues that zone
of hope is zone of prayer.
6
Therefore in the zone of hope can not be fear,
because of full trust in God. Marcel even speaks about hope giving act I
hope in thee for us
7
. That means hope is joint action of I and Other.

In accordance with philosopher Bloch, human being is capable
for vital processes that makes possible the decline of fear and the dawn of
hope. The vital processes can be known firstly as urging drives. Bloch
argues, that hope appears first as urging drive. Human being feels it as
hunger for things and thoughts. Bloch said, that much tastes of more
8

and hunger never can be contended.
Fahrenbach and Grentrup claim that the act of hope must be
accompanied by fear of the nonrealization of the hoped-for object if hope
does not wish to become inert. Schumacher and Day claim, that hope and
fear are contradictory and a human being cannot simultaneously hope for
an object and fear it.
9

The object of hope, which is good, and the object of fear, which
is an evil are opposites. Therefore the hope and fear can be thought as
opposites. Nevertheless the hope may be accompanied with a fear that
arises from the uncertainty inherent in the act of hope. There is the
possibility that the human being may not attain the object it hopes to
attain, whether it be for external reasons or reasons intrinsic to the human
being. In this case, fear stems from the obstacles that present themselves

5
Schumacher Bernard, Philosophy of Hope.Jozef Pieper and
Contemporary Debates on Hope (USA: Fordham University Press, 2003.),
65.-66.
6
Mapce
7
Marcel Gabriel, Homo viator. (Dsseldorf: Bastion Verlag, 1949.), 46.
8
Bloch Ernst, The Principle of Hope (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986), 21.
9
Schumacher Bernard, Philosophy of Hope. Jozef Pieper and
Contemporary Debates on Hope (USA: Fordham University Press, 2003.),
80.-81.
5

along the path leading to the possession of the difficult but possible
good, obstacles that in fact keep the human being from enjoying the object
in the future. In Hoffmeisters dictionary of philosophy hope is defined as
joyfull expectation.
10
Hope and joy can be compatible and separable. But
it will be another thema. Although fear accompanies the act of hope, hope
is not a necessary part of fear.
For existence of human being the phenomenon of hope and
phenomenon of fear are both compatible and separable. Therefore the
main problem which I solve: is hope pro or contra fear? For the explaining
of phenomenon of fear I will offer insight in the works of Heidegger.
According to Heidegger phenomenon of fear is a mode of state-
of-mind. He distinguishes three basic points of view in which
phenomenon of fear may be considered: (1) that in the face of which we
fear; (2) fearing as process; (3) that about which we fear. Heidegger said
that ..each of these three pertains to different items in the structure of
fear.
11

That in the face of which we fear, fearsome, is in every case
something we encounter as inside in our lifeworld. In fearing as such
which Heidegger characterizes as threatening is freed and allowed to
matter to us. We do not first ascertain a future evil(malum futurum) and
then fear it. But neither does fearing first take note of what is drawing
close; it discovers it beforehand in its fearsomeness,
12
wrotes Heidegger.
In fearing process fear can look at the fearsome explicitly, and make it
clear to itself. Fearsome is seen by circumspection because it has fear as
its state-of-mind. Fearing as possibility is fearfulness(Furchtsamkeit).
That about which fear fears is the fearing human being, in
Heidegger terms, Dasein. Fear always reveals Dasein in the Being of its
there. To fear about something is one thing, but fear about others differs
from it. Heidegger insists upon that fearing for other does not take away
his fear. On the contrary, hoping for other can take away ones hopes away
or make the hopes stronger. To look broadly, fearing for other can be
without fear of somebody, who can fear for it. Human being can be in
situation or out of it, but without fears. With hoping there are some
common aspects. Hoping human being can be hopeful and in the same

10
Pieper Jozef, Hope and History (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1994),
21.
11
Heidegger Martin, Being and Time(OxfordUK: Blackwell,1962), 179.
12
Ibid, 180.
6

situation without fundamental hope in the ground of his consciousness.
Maybe human being is hoping for something other or does not hoping at
the moment at all. For hoping human being, who is hoping for some goal
in his life, but have no smaller hopes for the moments in which one lives,
the phenomenon of hope is present, but in different way.
That about one is fearing can be not fearable for others.
Somebody can fear from spiders and can not explain why. With hope is
the same sometimes human being can hope without any explainings, be
hopefully and all.
Thus both fear and hope can be thought as modes of state-of-
mind. Both intend unreal future. These aspects are common to fear and
hope. There is no place for second sight, as argues Bloch, because such
futures are recognized as unreal. For Bloch and Pieper hope is in the basis
of all things. Without hope there is nothing important, because hope is one
of the deepest phenomenon of the human lifeworld.
Fear can be present even if there is hope. Hope can be present
even if there is fear. Fear and hope are the expectant emotions from the
same level. Bloch argues that hope is expectant emotion with positive
content, but fear expectant emotion with negative content.
13
If human
being has no hope, he can be afraid of something and have fear. From the
another point of view hope and fear are opposites. The absence of hope is
ground of fear. In accordance with Bloch, hope eliminates the fear and
therefore seems that hope is contra fear. Bloch wrotes:
Hope, this counter-emotion against anxiety and
fear, is therefore the most human of all mental feelings
and only accesible to men, and also refers to the
furthest and brightest horizon.
14
From the other side, fear and hope can be compatible, because
there are no point in which emerges hope and fear comes to an end.
Human being can not live only in hopes or fears. The hope can be
compatible with fear as the process of gradual elimination of fear. And
fear can be involved in gradual elimination of hope. Hope emerges when
is fear and hope can grow stronger because of it. Looking from the other
side, fear emerges, because of disapointed hopes. Therefore both fear and

13
Bloch Ernst, The Principle of Hope(Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986), 70.-
71.
14
Ibid, 75.
7
hope is thinkable together and offers significance one to another. The
work of hope is the process of gradual elimination of fear. Hope can grow
stronger if there are more fear because of elimination process, that is, work
of hope. In this process had to be involved both phenomenons fear and
hope. Because, the fear grows stronger if there are not enough hope. Of
course, can be situation that both fear and hope grows stronger. It is in the
moments, when the human beings recognize them in situation of war. It is
interesting fact, that many great works about fear and hope appears in the
time of World Wars. For example, Heideggers Being and Time,
Blochs The Principle of Hope, etc. Therefore in some aspects the hope
can depend from fear and the fear can be thought as provision of
emergence and decline of hope. Because fear is not thinkable without
hope. Both phenomenons fear and hope are essentially one for other. Fear
have double sided significance in the comprehension of the phenomenon
of hope. Hope can be pro and contra fear, because fear provides the hope
and offers significance of hope.

Bibliography
1. Bloch Ernst, The Principle of Hope(Cambridge: MIT Press,
1986).
2. Day John Patrick, Hope: A Philosophical Inquiry(Helsinki:Acta
Philosophica Fennica, 1991).
3. Fahrenbach Helmut, Wesen und Sinn der Hoffnung(Heidelberg,
1956).
4. Grentrup Theodor, Hoffen und Vertrauen (Wrzburg: Echter
Verlag, 1948).
5. Heidegger Martin, Being and Time(OxfordUK: Blackwell,1962).
6. Marcel Gabriel, Homo viator (Dsseldorf: Bastion Verlag, 1949).
7. Mapce , (: ,
1994).
8. Meisenhelder Thomas, Hope: A Phenomenological Prelude to
Critical Social Theory, Human studies, Jun/Se82, Vol.5, Issue3.
9. Pieper Jozef, Hope and History (San Francisco: Ignatius Press,
1994).
10. Schumacher Bernard, Philosophy of Hope.Jozef Pieper and
Contemporary Debates on Hope (USA: Fordham University
Press, 2003).