Eco-Anxiety: An Existential Perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The principal claim of this thesis is that anxiety when understood through the lens of philosophical existentialism is a mood of uneasiness that stems from the objectless possibilities, as opposed to real lived possibilities, entailed by the core conditions of our being. These can include anxiety over conditions such as freedom, mortality, identity, and so on. This anxiety has a self-cultivational aspect in that the reflection it motivates provides insight into the self. This self-cultivation of existential anxiety is key to how philosophers can assist those afflicted with the existential form of eco-anxiety, as opposed to the forms of coping offered by social science research that focus on a practical form of eco-anxiety. I show that previous accounts of eco-anxiety point towards a general understanding of existential eco-anxiety that gives a general basic description of what the phenomena is. My contribution is to give a definition of eco-anxiety that, while related to other forms of existential anxiety, accentuates its connection to past historical approaches to existential anxiety and highlights its foundation as a historically instigated phenomenon. While other definitions of eco-anxiety are not without value for understanding the non-pathological anxiety people often feel in the face of ecological crisis, my argument gives a general account that explains what constitutes existential eco-anxiety regardless of its specific manifestations and provides a framework for how philosophers can assist in self-cultivation. The insight gained from these findings is that philosophers can play a role in providing an ecologically friendly interpretation of different values and worldviews on which the anxious may draw to find new ways of living meaningfully in a rapidly changing world.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".