Sociologists have repeatedly examined how societies relate to what is possible, both for the individual and for the collective (Wright, 2011). Possibilities concern what could be different, both in people’s own lives and in society. Hope often stands in contrast to despair, and opportunities are distributed unequally, with some having greater access to a wealth of opportunities depending on their position in social networks (Burt, 2005). The sociology of opportunity has explored how the balance between optimism and criticism is crucial (Holmes, 2016).
Realistic idealism/critical optimism/maturity: a balance between idealism and realism, or criticism and optimism. According to the philosopher (Nieman 2013), realism and idealism must be in balance for maturity, the ability to think idealistically while grounding that thinking in the present, in everyday life, and in the struggle with the present; to be optimistic and hopeful while grounded in critical awareness (Holmes, 2016). Adulthood is a balance between realism and idealism, according to Susan Nieman (2013). Idealism in seeing what in the world could be different, and realism in starting this project somewhere. One might add that realism and idealism also involve finding a balance between what needs to change and what can be preserved, between progressivism and conservatism. Nieman uses the teenager as an example, who oscillates between fatalistic realism, where nothing can be changed, everything is as it is and always has been, and the adult who has lost idealism and is left with only a dry realism (2013). Nieman also observes that the teenager can swing toward over, idealism, where everything must be changed immediately; otherwise, the world and everyone in it is evil. When the teenager realizes this is not possible, they swing back to fatalistic realism. According to Nieman, building on Kant’s ideas, adulthood involves managing this balance between idealism and realism.
In research, the concept of “realistic utopias” has been used to highlight what already exists as a springboard for achieving this on a larger scale through experimentation and reform (Wright, 2011). The balance between progressivism and conservatism also lies in not striving for change as an end in itself, or for the status quo as an end in itself, but rather in pursuing the common good as the goal. Progressivism can also be so radical that it destroys important aspects of the world and systems we value; there are risks associated with change. Conservatism can also go so far as to become rigid, to the point where it cannot handle the changes that need to be addressed.
Adulthood is a balance that can exist on a higher plane. Adulthood can be found in the personal struggle, the mature parent who takes responsibility for their family and strives to improve their lives. Adulthood can also be found in civic engagement, mature citizenship characterized by realistic idealism in one’s actions. Imbalances include an infantilized private struggle where one fails to take responsibility, oscillates between idealism and realism, and indulges in consumption and play without higher purposes beyond oneself (Nieman, 2013; Barber, 2006). Civic struggle can also be infantilized, as we see in Brennan’s conceptualization of “hobbits” (who are stuck in private struggle and want nothing to do with what is happening in the wider world) and “hooligans” who view civic struggle and politics as a spectator sport between different teams (Brennan, 2016).
Holmes introduces the concept of critical optimism while arguing that sociology generally has a pessimistic bias (Holmes, 2016). Critical optimism strikes a balance in that it is a form of optimism that constitutes a “critical action of the will,” a phrase borrowed from Gramsci (Holmes, 2016). Holmes argues that we need an optimistic view of change, echoing others who contend that agency cannot be dismissed, as it is empirically difficult to ignore that agency manifests itself in various ways (Paulsen, 2013; Scott, 1999). Critical optimism involves a critical awareness of the world’s problems, coupled with the belief that something can be done about them. This is very similar to Nieman’s view of adulthood: realistic idealism. Optimism is not something that is purely individual, but is primarily rooted in social interactions that, for example, generate emotional energy leading to optimism and pride, as well as broader “cultures of optimism” (Bennet, 2011).
Imbalances
Below are various imbalances in this dimension.
Excessive optimism when something you desire stands in the way of your flourishing (Berlant, 2011). It could be an idea, a socio, technology or psycho, technology, or a political vision that gives us hope for flourishing but negatively affects us.
The Icarus syndrome (Alvesson, 2019) is having too much self, confidence, flying so close to the sun that you crash while reaching for too much. This could also be seen as an infantile (unrealistic) idealism, based on Nieman (2013).
“Cruel pessimism”, inspired by Berlant’s concept of “cruel optimism”, is another imbalance I’d like to add, echoing Aristotle’s concept of imbalance when we have too little self, confidence, which prevents us from taking action (Aristotle, 1998). Cruel pessimism is the perception that the world is unmanageable or that structures seem to overwhelm us, a phenomenon known in psychology as learned helplessness (Seligman, 1966). It is a form of cruel pessimism in that the pessimism itself is false and unnecessary. This contrasts with a form of pessimism that is more philosophically grounded, à la Schopenhauer, and can be productive, including the psychological construct “defensive pessimism” (Norem & Cantor, 1986). Critical pessimism is an imbalance that Holmes argues exists as a bias among sociologists (2017). Critical pessimism has the virtue of attempting to understand a phenomenon, but fails to develop alternatives and arrives at a generally pessimistic conclusion that can become reified. This can become a form of cruel pessimism because it underestimates the agency and resources available for change.
Fatalistic escapism is another imbalance in which we are pessimistic and flee into, for example, the gaming world in search of artificial adventures. Denial is a concept used by Norgaard (2011) to describe attitudes toward climate change, with other sociologists identifying various forms of denial: organizational, responsive, and everyday denial (Lindvall, Vowles & Hutlman, 2020). Turner, from a socio, dynamic perspective, has also used denial as a defense mechanism that people may resort to (2006).
Catastrophe thinking (Furedi, 2019, 258) is a form of hyperreflexive unreality; it involves seeing how events could lead to a catastrophe while underestimating existing social safeguards and one’s own agency to cope with adversity.
An infantilized private struggle in which one avoids taking responsibility, oscillates between idealism and realism, and indulges in consumption and play without higher purposes beyond oneself (Nieman, 2013; Barber, 2006). Civic struggle can also be infantilized, as we see in Brennan’s conceptualization of “hobbits” (who are stuck in private struggle and want nothing to do with what is happening in the wider world) and “hooligans” who view civic struggle and politics as a spectator sport between different teams (Brennan, 2016).
Reified realism (ego, reification, cynicism): The individual exhibits a strong internalization/reification of the prevailing order. This can also be directed toward the self, in the form of ego, essentialization or ego, reification: “I am who I am and have always been” (Paulsen, 2017).
“Infantilized” (Barber, 2007; Nieman, 2013) is the opposite of adulthood, which is realistic idealism. Here, “infantilized” refers to an excessive swing between realism, which becomes reified cynicism, and unrealistic idealism.
Unrealistic cynicism manifests as nostalgic or reactionary conservatism that overestimates the dangers of change, while unrealistic idealism, or over, progressivism, underestimates these dangers and overestimates the positive effects of change.
One, dimensional thinking is another concept introduced by Marcuse to describe an overemphasis on “realism” and conservatism, where, due to ideology, thoughts of other alternatives are quickly set aside or do not even arise.
Utopophobia can hinder efforts to strive for just societies because “political feasibility” can become a self, fulfilling prophecy (Estlund, 2014). How wide is this gap between what we should be able to do (ability) and what we actually do? How wide should this gap be? Estlund calls it “convenient realism” when there is no difference between the ideal and what we can actually do (2020). Estlund’s argument is that utopia is an essential part of political philosophy and must always be present, even if it is not entirely attainable. The gap between mediocrity and a society of moral perfection is something we will discover as we pursue the good life (Savage, 2021). Here, the opposite can also be considered: reified utopianism or naïve realism, in which one believes one has a great capacity to envision what the best society could be (Popper).