Our attitudes toward human culpability for environmental problems have moral and emotional import, influencing our basic capacities for believing cooperative action and environmental repair are even possible. In this paper, I suggest that having the virtue of forgivingness as a response to environmental harm is generally good for moral character, preserving us from morally risky varieties of pessimism and despair. I define forgivingness as a forward-looking disposition based on Robin Dillon’s conception of preservative forgiveness, a preparation to be deeply and (...) abidingly accepting yet expecting human error. As with other virtues, however, preservative forgiveness is available to some of us more than others; in the second half of this paper, I consider the deep challenge posed by rational pessimism, especially on the part of those who have been given many reasons not to hope for the very moral improvements for which they strive. I conclude that for those of us with the power roles and personal resources especially conducive to environmental activism, preservative forgiveness inclines us to remain engaged in environmental activism with fellow flawed human beings, recognizing our own mutual depredations while committing us to cooperatively respond. (shrink)

Today, people are better informed about environmental degradation than ever before. However, this does not imply that people are more engaged toward ecological issues nor are they more committed to achieve greater ecological justice. In this respect, environmental education is paradigmatic: the current generation of young people is, by far and without any doubt, the most knowledgeable and aware of environmental problems thanks, among other things, to the presence since the end of the 20th century of environmental education in primary (...) and secondary school. However, levels of commitment to ecological issues that are significantly higher than before are not observed, except when it comes to individual pro-environmental behavior. How to link environmental awareness with a collective, political, ecosocial and ecocitizen commitment? In order to advance avenues for reflection on this issue, firstly this article presents the elements that characterize the current ecosocial crisis. Secondly, it addresses the ecosocial crisis as a crisis of knowledge that ultimately points to the challenge of transforming the visions of the world. Thirdly, it considers the ecosocial crisis as an opportunity that opens up the possibility of creating new worlds on the planet. Fourthly, the ecosocial crisis is presented as a crisis of contemporary education. Fifthly, it summarizes the two risks to consider in the practice of ecosocial education: the risk of dogmatism and the risk of blaming individuals for global problems. Finally, some clues are proposed that point to the Philosophy for children program as a program that can support the educational practice needed by the current educational and ecosocial crisis, as well as limits recognized risks of ecosocial education. (shrink)