I’ve been exploring philosophical pessimism lately. It’s not all Schopenhauer and his misery; it’s actually a pretty interesting angle. The dominant strand of philosophical thought suggests that the application of human reason, through pure reason or through technological advances, will lead us to better places. This includes in politics. Pessimism tells us to expect nothing in particular, or perhaps to expect anything. Things can always get better, or always get worse. We have no reason to expect either to occur in the long-term. We have no reason to think that we’ll ever pull ourselves up, or that any effort at pulling ourselves up will last, because we aren’t beings that can make things better reliably, or we live in a world that won’t let us make things better reliably, or both.

This seems kinda bleak. But pessimists sometimes argue this is pretty liberating and refocuses us on the right-now. We can’t trust that reason or technology or any other natural trend in human behavior or “arc of the universe” will save us. If we want a better world, we have no option other than to stand up and try to win it. We might very well fail, but the cost of trying is the possibility of failing.

I’m a Unitarian Universalist, and philosophical pessimism doesn’t slot neatly into that. As a liberal religion, it retains a certain hope for the future of humanity, a faith in our ability to improve. It commonly speaks of an “original blessing,” a belief that every soul is a sacred good in the world. That doesn’t naturally mesh with the pessimist idea that we are constitutionally incapable of reliably making things better.

But I’ve been playing with an alternative, almost “shadow” version of Unitarian Universalist theology that in many ways mirrors and complements more traditional presentations, drawing on philosophical pessimism.

The First Principle: The Inherent Worth and Dignity of Every Person

Unitarian Universalism teaches the inherent worth and dignity of every person. In fact, this is the first principle. While most Unitarian Universalists interpret this as seeing every person as a positive imprint upon the world, I understand it through seeing consciousness as the capacity to do wrong. Rocks are not conscious; rocks do not make decisions; rocks do not make mistakes. Rocks are perfect at being rocks. Humans are conscious; humans make decisions; humans make mistakes. We have the distinctive capability to do things wrong, and that is what makes us inherently valuable, and gives us dignity even when we aren’t at our best.

The Third and Fourth Principles: Communal Growth and the Free and Responsible Search for Meaning

We exist in a world that does not provide easy meaning, and we are not even provided a guide on how to find meaning. We are all in the struggle together. Because of this, we have a reason to accept one another while still helping each other grow. This growth will probably look different in each person. Our shared predicament provides the opportunity to bond over the lack of easy meaning and the process of responding to that.

The Seventh Principle: Respect for the Interdependent Web of All Existence of Which We Are a Part

This is most immediately an ecological idea, but it’s even more so. In pessimism, we find that we all share vulnerability. Every conscious being lives in a world that is not altogether friendly to consciousness, and every conscious being shares vulnerability to this world and to each other. What impacts one of us impacts the web widely; our vulnerability ties us together. The unpredictability of the world comes for us all, and impacts us all. We’re in this together.

The Second and Sixth Principles: Justice, Compassion, Peace, and Liberty for All

The fact that we’re in this together, intimately vulnerable in a world that is not altogether kind, gives us an imperative to act. The world will not get better on its own. Our only chance at improving it is if we try—and we may fail, but we have to try. Our actions constitute our reason for hope.

The Fifth Principle: The Right of Conscience and the Use of the Democratic Process Within Our Congregations and in Society at Large

And, lastly, democracy. Because if we’re in this together and our actions are our only hope for a better world, let’s act together. Hoping in individual action is self-deception about our place in the web.

---

This is a quick summary of my thoughts, but you can go deeper. For example, Unitarian Universalism contains a fascinating two-step between the individual-as-individual and individual-as-constituted, individual-as-process. You can find this in thinkers like Kierkegaard and Sartre, who felt similarly, and also found that this duality creates the potential for intense difficult emotions. Kierkegaard said, to simplify, that the misplacement caused by being both self-as-being and self-as-becoming creates an ontological condition of despair, because we can’t stabilize ourself between the two without an existential anchor. Unitarian Universalism might suggest, with Love at the Center, that love is our existential anchor. And so through Kierkegaard, a “shadow” Unitarian Universalism might discuss the difficult facts of being a person in the world, and how the path through involves love. (Not to say that no one does this; they just usually do it in quite cheery terms.)

I find pessimism healing. It returns me to the here-and-now by reminding me that the future is uncertain and says that, if I give a damn, I better do something. It tells me that I’m only human and will make mistakes, and that being only human is beautiful, even as it’s hard. It tells me that my dark moods don’t do a thing to negate my worth, and every dark thought I have is itself proof of my value.

Pessimism might not be for everyone. But I bet there’s a few souls out there that, like me, could use it. I hope they find it.