ABSTRACT
The aim of this chapter is to continue transversal reasoning (TR) with a conversation between Sacks and Bowles on change of identity, and between Sacks and Ariely on the governance of change of identity. The reason for TR is to explore its relevance for a social response to radical uncertainty in the context of climate change. The relevance of the conversation between Sacks and Bowles on change of identity is that it highlights the need for time, expressed as a journey of two stages. The first stage of the journey is based on who we are, the identity underlying the actions that caused climate change. The second stage of the journey orients us to a new and liberating identity, a new ‘we’. It is about who humans and non-humans want to be with one another. Hope does not accentuate the outcome of a response to climate change, but the process towards the outcome. TR shows that other-regarding motivation, an essential ingredient for a social response, can be crowded out by monetary incentives. TR also shows that there is not yet an institution that can stimulate wise combinations of self-interest and other-regarding motivation in order to develop prudent policies. TR between Sacks and Ariely highlights a public Sabbath, a ‘workplace of hope’, as a possible key public institution to coordinate a social response to radical uncertainty in the context of climate change for all involved, not just religious people. A workplace of hope can also deepen existing meetings and summits by providing rituals to embrace radical uncertainty in the context of climate change.
