Transcendental Naturalism

1. Introduction

Transcendental Naturalism is a novel philosophical orientation whose scope and ambition match the challenges of the Anthropocene. It was introduced in my 2023 book Climate, God and Uncertainty (Petersen, 2023). Rooted in a critical engagement with both naturalist and transcendental traditions, it seeks to transcend the dualism between fact and value, nature and culture, and certainty and uncertainty, especially as these issues manifest in the contemporary intersections of science, religion, and public policy. Rather than reducing reality to physical facts accessible only to science (scientistic naturalism) or retreating to radical relativism, Transcendental Naturalism develops a middle way: valuing science’s empirical commitments while elevating the status of values, wonder, and human creativity as intrinsic features of the natural world.

Guided by the works of Immanuel Kant, Heinrich Rickert, William James, and Bruno Latour, Transcendental Naturalism regards nature not as disenchanted “stuff,” but as a complex, value-infused field—“the world on this side”—encompassing all lived, symbolic, and factual realities. It argues that values are not mere projections or cultural overlays but have an ontological status as part of the world’s constitution. In this framework, uncertainty is not a deficit or inconvenience but a creative resource propelling judgment, critical reflection, and ethical action, which qualities are crucial for responding to issues such as climate change.

Transcendental Naturalism was developed through my interdisciplinary engagement with science, theology, and public policy in response to global environmental change and the challenges posed by scientism and the climate crisis. Transcendental Naturalism positions itself as a distinct response to modern disenchantment and the marginalization of non-Western perspectives in science and policy.

A core principle of Transcendental Naturalism is the rejection of scientism—the belief that only science yields true knowledge or that reality is strictly material. Instead, this framework respects the empirical achievements of science while embracing values as existing but unreal, ideal, or a priori elements within both ontology and epistemology. Inspired by Rickert’s analysis, values are seen as intrinsic to different cultural domains, including science and religion: values shape judgment, which is understood as the realization of values through experience. This process is always situated within uncertainty, acknowledging that neither total metaphysical certainty nor absolute skepticism is possible; what exists is a continual negotiation of wonder, judgment, and value in specific contexts.

Transcendental Naturalism is characterized by methodological pluralism. It refuses to take sides in theistic versus atheistic metaphysical debates (or vis-à-vis agnosticism), instead clarifying the conditions for knowledge, value realization, and judgment within cultures. The approach is further influenced by philosophy of science, science and technology studies, philosophy of religion, religious studies, and ecological philosophy, seeking frameworks that respect uncertainty and value pluralism. Ultimately, it advocates for more inclusive, rigorous approaches to knowledge and value in scientific, religious, and other cultural domains.

In summary, Transcendental Naturalism offers a pluralist, open-ended, and continually self-critical approach, mediating between science and other cultural domains, faith and doubt, in pursuit of what I call an “appropriate philosophy under climate change.”

2. History

2.1. Origins and Intellectual Influences

The intellectual roots of Transcendental Naturalism are manifold: the critical philosophy of Kant and its neo-Kantian and pragmatist successors, and the recent re-examination of naturalistic philosophy that has emerged in the wake of scientism and the climate crisis. My philosophical journey, as recounted in Climate, God and Uncertainty, began with my interdisciplinary work integrating science, public policy, and theology under the shadow of global environmental change. Critical to my development of Transcendental Naturalism were three figures: Heinrich Rickert (whose transcendental analysis of values is central), William James (whose radical empiricism and concept of “pure experience” undergird a pluralist approach), and Bruno Latour (whose empirical philosophy and critique of modernity provide the immediate backdrop for contemporary application).

Transcendental Naturalism draws deeply on the works of Heinrich Rickert (especially Rickert, 1921, 1934), whose non-metaphysical (that is, pertaining to “the world on this side”) transcendental philosophy anchors values as having a separate ontological status: values, such as truth or beauty, exist but are not accessible through empirical means alone. Rickert’s distinctions between subjective and objective values, and between epistemic acts and value content, allow Transcendental Naturalism to theorize about how values shape scientific and religious practices without reducing them to mere psychological phenomena.

William James’s radical empiricism (James, 1912/1976) and philosophy of emotion (James, 1890/1981) provide further intellectual fuel. Through James, Transcendental Naturalism incorporates the idea that belief, wonder, and judgment carry aesthetic and emotional dimensions, yet remain rooted in the lived experience of uncertainty (James, 1897/1979). James stresses that ultimate realities and scientific concepts arise through valuation as much as through factual investigation.

Bruno Latour’s occasionalist empiricism and pluralistic ontology (Latour, 2012/2013) are also fundamental: Latour’s critique of the boundaries between nature and culture, science and religion, is repurposed to highlight the continual crossings and uncertainties involved in value-driven practice, especially in climate contexts (Latour, 2015/2017). Transcendental Naturalism draws especially on Latour’s modes of existence framework and critiques of scientistic naturalism, but it also seeks to correct and extend Latour’s approach in crucial ways.

While appreciating Latour’s pluralistic take on science, religion, and politics—and his strong emphasis on uncertainty and the pitfalls of separating nature and culture—I argue that Latour’s methodology neglects the transcendental dimension of values and can slide into metaphysics without sufficient reflexivity about how values are realized in practice. Transcendental Naturalism goes beyond Latour by situating value as having a non-metaphysical existing ontological status, interpretable within cultural practices. Transcendental Naturalism maintains that enriching Latourian occasionalist empiricism with a transcendental critique allows for deeper philosophical reflection on how uncertainty, value, and meaning intersect under climate change, ultimately ensuring the dignity of plural rationalities in science, religion, and public life

2.2. Aims and Methodological Commitments

Transcendental Naturalism was motivated by the problems of modern “disenchantment,” the marginalization of non-Western worldviews in science and policy, and the urgent need for frameworks that take both uncertainty and value pluralism seriously. Unlike most forms of naturalism, which are defined primarily in opposition to supernaturalism and often presuppose atheism or agnosticism, Transcendental Naturalism insists that both theistic and atheistic metaphysics (as well as agnosticism) are equally possible options within its methodological pluralism.

The aim of Transcendental Naturalism is not to resolve metaphysical debates through dogmatic assertion, but to clarify the conditions of knowledge, judgment, and value realization in the context of contemporary cultures.

3. Description

3.1. Defining Features

At its core, Transcendental Naturalism makes two distinguishing claims:

• It respects the empirical rigor and methodological achievements of the sciences, but squarely rejects scientism, that is, the idea that only science leads to knowledge, or that all reality reduces to physical or material facts.

• It admits values (understood after Rickert as “ideal,” a priori, or “unreal” elements) as part of the ontology and epistemology of the world. These values are not outside nature, but part of it, though not in the same way as physical entities.

Transcendental naturalism differentiates itself from both traditional transcendental philosophy and naturalist philosophy primarily through its ontological and methodological stance. While transcendental philosophy, particularly in Kant’s form, investigates the a priori conditions of knowledge often with metaphysical assumptions about things-in-themselves (Dinge an sich), Transcendental Naturalism adopts a non-metaphysical, neo-Kantian-inspired approach (following Heinrich Rickert) that situates values as existing yet non-empirical elements within the world “on this side,” refraining from postulating any metaphysical beyond. It focuses on the openness to uncertainty and the creative role of judgment and values in cultural practices, including science and religion, without reducing them to subjective or empirical phenomena alone.

Following Rickert, values give shape and structure to all cultural domains. Judgment involves the realization of values within experience, and this realization is always accompanied by uncertainty. Neither metaphysical certainty nor total skepticism is possible; instead, there is a continuous negotiation of wonder, judgment, and value in context.

In contrast with standard naturalist philosophy, especially scientistic naturalism—which limits knowledge to empirical science and excludes a priori values—Transcendental Naturalism embraces an expansive concept of nature. It includes not only empirical reality but also transcendent values as integral parts of nature, thereby rejecting scientism yet respecting scientific methods. It is philosophically modest, avoiding metaphysical speculation while acknowledging that both atheism, theism, and agnosticism can be considered a-theoretical commitments each compatible with this framework.

This positions Transcendental Naturalism as an open-ended, reflective philosophy attentive to uncertainty and values in the world, bridging gaps between different cultural domains without conflating or excluding any.

3.2. Components and System

Transcendental Naturalism is systematically developed in Petersen (2023) through the following components in a systemic whole:

• Uncertainty—Not a failing, but a generative aspect of knowledge, creativity, and culture. By valuing uncertainty, Transcendental Naturalism avoids both dogmatism and relativism, carving out space for epistemic humility and pluralism.

• Wonder—Regarded as a positive, motivating force that opens human practices to mystery and meaning, countering the modern condition of disenchantment as discussed by James and Latour. Transcendental Naturalism sees wonder as fundamental to the scientific, religious, and aesthetic quests for truth, beauty, justice, and purpose.

• Judgment—Drawing on Kant and Rickert, judgments are understood as creative acts linking perceptual facts with transcendental values. Human freedom and context play critical roles, and all judgments are marked by uncertainty.

• Values—Instead of ignoring or reducing the non-empirical, Transcendental Naturalism ontologically integrates values as an essential part of the world, following Rickert’s philosophy and contesting purely factual or utilitarian worldviews.

• Models—Scientific, religious, and other models are evaluated as context-bound, partial, and provisional. Transcendental Naturalism entails a position of weak referential realism that acknowledges reality’s independence but also the limits of conceptualization.

Below, these components are further described.

In Transcendental Naturalism, uncertainty is defined as an epistemological notion related to a lack of knowledge residing in the concepts we use, which carries a negative qualification but also underpins human creativity positively. It is characterized by a fundamental openness in how concepts capture underlying experiences, allowing theoretical space for real, factual novelty in the world. Uncertainty is distinguished from ignorance. Uncertainty plays a central role in Transcendental Naturalism as it highlights the intrinsic openness and fallibility of judgment and values within cultural practices such as science and religion. The philosophical framework embraces this uncertainty as a driving force behind wonder, creativity, and valuation, rejecting excessive certainty or scientistic reductionism while affirming that uncertainty does not negate meaningful knowledge. Instead, it insists on a philosophical approach that welcomes the complexity and provisionality of knowledge in the face of phenomena like climate change, grounding values in a non-metaphysical transcendental framework.

Wonder is defined as a complex human emotional experience situated at the border of sensation and thought, aesthetics and science. Wonder can manifest as both puzzlement and awe, and it plays a critical role in relation to uncertainty in scientific and religious practices (as well as all other cultural practices). Drawing heavily on William James’s philosophy, wonder is connected to a sense of openness to the unknown, a gateway between experience and valuation, where wonder can lead to intimations of metaphysical transcendence without necessitating metaphysical commitment. Wonder’s role in Transcendental Naturalism is to highlight the emotional and philosophical significance of uncertainty by encouraging receptivity to “dizzying otherness” and the creative potential within human engagement with the world. It acts as a catalyst for embracing uncertainty as a fundamental condition, inspiring deeper reflection and valuation practices, especially in the contexts of science, religion, and climate change.

Judgment is defined as a complex, multifaceted cognitive act that occurs between the realms of real psychophysical acts of judgment and the unreal but valid contents of judgment. Building on neo-Kantian philosopher Heinrich Rickert, judgment is described as making a tentative, uncertain connection between the real and the unreal, creating fallible realizations of cultures and values within the world. Judgment is not only about theoretical cognition but is deeply intertwined with aesthetic appreciation and emotion, bridging theoretical and practical knowledge. It plays a crucial role in dealing with uncertainty, enabling evaluative decisions in contexts where no definitive algorithmic or heuristic rules apply. Judgments are influenced by aesthetic emotions like wonder and joy, which contribute to valuing and orienting human engagement with reality. Thus, the power of judgment is foundational for Transcendental Naturalism, as it facilitates meaning-making, valuation, and responsible action under conditions of uncertainty.

Values are defined as unreal, yet existing and fundamental aspects that give meaning and structure to cultural practices across domains. Drawing on Heinrich Rickert’s philosophy, Transcendental Naturalism emphasizes the ontological and normative distinction between subjective or individual values and objective or universal values, acknowledging that while values cannot be created by judgment, they are anchored in an unreal sphere—an a priori dimension that exists beyond empirical verification. Values serve as the normative criteria guiding actions within practices, influencing what is deemed meaningful or valid. In Transcendental Naturalism, values are central because valuations provide meaning, while they are both existing and fallible, shaping human engagement with the world under conditions of uncertainty. This conception integrates the emotional, aesthetic, and moral dimensions of valuation, emphasizing that values are not merely subjective but have a transcendental, ontological status that is essential for understanding culture and practices.

Finally, models are defined as conceptual tools that mediate between human conceptual frameworks and the world. Transcendental Naturalism highlights that models are results of transformative acts within cultural practices, yet their roles differ between domains: in science, models aim at being representations that tentatively correspond to an independently existing world. In religion, models fulfill more symbolic and poietic functions, shaping meaning and experience without requiring direct empirical correspondence. Models play a crucial role in Transcendental Naturalism by illustrating the openness and uncertainty inherent in human knowledge and practice. They exemplify how conceptual extensions enable engagement with the world while acknowledging an inevitable gap between models and reality. This approach underlines the fallibility and creative potential within practices, advocating for plural cognitive values guiding theory and model choice across different cultural domains, reflecting Transcendental Naturalism’s emphasis on valuing uncertainty and plural rationalities

4. Application

Transcendental Naturalism is applied in my 2023 book to domains where uncertainty and value pluralism are most acute—especially climate science, public policy, and the interface between science and religion. The framework’s methodology uses the lens of wonder not merely as a subjective state but as a distinct philosophical posture that invites humans to approach uncertainty positively, as a resource for inquiry, creativity, and humility.

Wonder in scientific practices is experienced as an emotional and cognitive response to the complexity and mystery of the natural world. It involves awe and puzzlement arising from the recognition of uncertainty within scientific inquiry. This wonder motivates scientists to continue exploring and refining models, theories, and hypotheses, reflecting the provisional and fallible nature of scientific knowledge. It sustains an openness to new discoveries and deepens engagement with the phenomena under investigation, supporting the Transcendental Naturalistic view that science, while empirical, operates within a framework of uncertainty and creative judgment. Such openness goes with an ethos of epistemic humility. Rather than seeking final answers, the Transcendental Naturalist adopts practices that admit the provisionality and context-dependence of knowledge, greatly enhancing the potential for cross-disciplinary and intercultural dialogue.

Wonder in religion can be associated with religious ritual. Such ritual can evoke the emotion of wonder by making the worshipper aware of God’s intimate knowledge and presence. The ritual use of sacred texts and hallowed language helps worshippers “creep into God,” momentarily withdrawing from the natural world and opening their thoughts toward the sacred Other. Such practices foster a communal experience of wonder that supports spiritual receptivity and engagement with metaphysical transcendence, highlighting the emotional and aesthetic dimensions central to religious life and its values within Transcendental Naturalism.

4.1. Ecological Conservation and Poetics

Transcendental Naturalism is applied in Petersen (2023, Chapter 6) to the issue of ecological conservation, in the context of climate change. Uncertainty is a fundamental characteristic in this issue arising from complex, unpredictable natural and social systems. This uncertainty necessitates humility and careful judgment in both scientific inquiry and policy decisions. Wonder plays a vital role by fostering emotional and experiential engagement with nature, exemplified by initiatives like Jane Goodall’s hands-on conservation projects, which inspire deeper commitment and meaning. Judgment is essential for navigating value-laden choices, integrating emotion, reason, and contextual ethics to manage ecological challenges where clear-cut answers are lacking. Values—recognized as both subjective and objective—form the normative foundation for conservation efforts, demanding philosophical reflection rather than uncritical acceptance. Models serve as provisional, value-laden tools representing partial truths about ecosystems, guiding action while requiring continuous critical scrutiny and openness to plural rationalities.

At the heart of Transcendental Naturalism’s application to ecological conservation is the concept of poetics, which links scientific knowledge to human meaning. Poetics extends beyond poetry to encompass the narrative, metaphor, and emotional elements that (re-)enchant the natural world, countering the disenchantment caused by strict scientism. It nurtures intrinsic valuing of nature and inspires committed ecological action by translating scientific uncertainty into culturally resonant myths and symbols. Poetics bridges modern scientific approaches with diverse cultural worldviews, supporting inclusive conservation strategies. Thus, in Transcendental Naturalism, poetics, alongside uncertainty, wonder, judgment, values, and models, collectively sustains a pluralistic, meaningful, and responsible approach to ecological conservation.

Petersen (2023, Chapter 6) critiques attempts to erect “science-compatible religions” as substitutes for enchanted worldviews, instead suggesting that authentic poetics must incorporate both the bleakness and the awe of uncertainty, without reducing these to projects for control or mere consolation. The “re-enchantment” sought is not a return to naïve myth but a cultivated openness to mystery within empirical limits.

4.2. Climate Modeling and Authorities

Another concrete application of Transcendental Naturalism’s components appears in my treatment of climate modeling (Petersen, 2023, Chapter 7). In climate modeling, uncertainty is central due to the inherent complexity and incomplete knowledge about Earth’s systems, making model predictions provisional and fallible. Wonder motivates scientists to remain open to new data and surprises in climate phenomena. Judgment is required to navigate value-laden decisions in model construction, interpretation, and application, balancing simplicity and complexity. Values guide the prioritization of scientific aims and societal goals, embedding ethical considerations in climate assessments. Models function as mediating instruments that represent partial truths about climatic processes, serving as tools for exploration, measurement, and policy design.

Transcendental Naturalism interprets these concepts as intertwined in a non-metaphysical framework, emphasizing creativity, fallibility, and plural rationalities to responsibly engage with the uncertainties and values inherent in climate science and politics. Transcendental Naturalism’s criticism of climate modeling concerns the overconfidence and perceived certainty attached to models. Scientists often portray models as providing definitive predictions, which can obscure the inherent uncertainties and provisional nature of modeling (see also Petersen, 2006/2012). This framing may lead policymakers and the public to underestimate the model’s limitations, fostering a false sense of certainty about future climate scenarios. Models are historically and practically embedded within a context of uncertainty, judgment, and values, which must be transparently communicated to avoid overreliance and misinterpretation. Recognizing models as mediating tools rather than absolute truths can foster a more humble, reflexive, and responsible advisory process about climate change.

Authorities in climate modeling and science advice represent diverse values and interests, navigating the uncertainties inherent in scientific practices while providing legitimacy and credibility. Authority rests not solely on objective scientific truth but on expert judgment, social context, and the ability to manage complex networks of instruments and stakeholders. Climate scientists, as embodied experts, exercise political power by representing often voiceless agents affected by climate change. Their authority requires diplomatic engagement across different rationalities, transparency about uncertainty, and reflexivity about the epistemic and social dimensions of their expertise, fostering trust and responsible advice in climate governance

4.3. Environmental Planning and Futures

Transcendental Naturalism is furthermore applied in Petersen (2023, Chapter 8) to how environmental planning negotiates interactions with non-modern worldviews, particularly under the pressures of climate change. Uncertainty in ecological and social systems calls for humility in planning processes. Wonder fosters openness to other epistemologies and ontologies, encouraging planners to engage with a diversity of worldviews beyond purely scientific rationalism. Judgment is exercised critically and contextually, as decisions must balance competing values and interpret models that are inherently provisional and fallible. Values serve as the normative grounding for priorities and actions, recognizing both the universal and culturally specific significance embedded in environmental governance. Models function as mediating tools to guide decisions but require openness to critique and adaptation as they simplify complex realities.

Interactions with non-modern worldviews remind planners to respect holistic, often spiritual relationships with nature, such as indigenous concepts like Mother Earth or Buddhist Sufficiency Economy, which emphasize relationality and inner experience. These perspectives challenge the modern scientific paradigm’s focus on control and progress, urging Transcendental Naturalism’s diplomatic approach that honors plural rationalities and fosters dialogue across epistemic divides. This inclusive posture enables more ethical, contextualized, and culturally sensitive planning under fundamental uncertainty.

Thus environmental planning involves recognizing the openness and plurality of possible future states under conditions of uncertainty and value plurality. Transcendental Naturalism critiques deterministic and scientistic views of the future that assume one fixed outcome, instead aligning with pluralistic and indeterministic perspectives inspired by philosophers like William James and Bruno Latour. Futures are conceived not as pre-determined linear paths but as contingent possibilities, inviting active human creativity and moral responsibility in co-creating the world’s trajectory. Environmental planning must engage with diverse conceptions of futures, including those from non-modern worldviews such as indigenous and Buddhist traditions, which emphasize relationality, spirituality, and balance rather than control. Modern planning, however, tends to prioritize scientific models and cost-benefit analyses, often disregarding non-modern perspectives. Transcendental Naturalism advocates for a diplomatic, pluralistic approach that opens policy discussions to multiple future imaginations, fostering inclusivity and mutual respect.

5. Reception

Transcendental Naturalism has sparked an active and ongoing conversation among scholars of science and religion. Critical commentaries and my response in Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science (Bauman, 2025; Petersen, 2025; Reeves, 2025; Sideris, 2025; van den Brink, 2025) highlight both the promise and the challenges of the approach. All the commentators lauded its radical openness, multi-perspectival inclusivity, and contemporary relevance, especially as an advance over forms of naturalism that marginalize religious, aesthetic, or existential concerns. One commentator queried its Kantian heritage—asking to what extent its “transcendental” constraints are compatible with the full diversity of lived metaphysics, including forms of religious realism or empiricist skepticism.

One point of recurring discussion is my perceived anti-metaphysical stance, particularly my refusal to grant definitive philosophical or scientific status to any ultimate account of reality. Some see this as liberating, while others argue it risks a type of ambiguity that can frustrate theists or hard naturalists alike. Even on this point, however, Transcendental Naturalism advocates perpetual openness and the value of ongoing conversation, making my approach a kind of “prolegomena” or platform for further inquiry rather than a systematized metaphysical doctrine (Petersen, 2025).

Specifically, Josh Reeves (2025) challenged the need to expand the concept of “nature” to include transcendental values. I responded (Petersen, 2025) that my metamodern expansion of the concept of “nature” (standing for “world”) is philosophically warranted while also advising natural scientists to largely stick with a modern notion of “nature” (not including values) to do their science. Whitney Bauman (2025) asked about the links between Transcendental Naturalism and critical theories (criticism) on the one hand and emergence theory on the other. I responded (Petersen, 2025) that the links to criticism and emergence are inherent in Transcendental Naturalism but largely left implicit in Petersen (2023). Gijsbert van den Brink (2025) was afraid that Transcendental Naturalism takes it as “unscientific” (in the sense of not being part of Wissenschaft) to theorize about God, which would make Transcendental Naturalism inaccessible to theists. I responded (Petersen, 2025) that I ultimately do not want to exclude metaphysics from philosophy and acknowledge that all philosophy, so also Transcendental Naturalism, starts from metaphysical assumptions. Finally, Lisa Sideris (2025) pointed out that the way Petersen (2023) engaged with wonder was skewed towards wonder in science, including where poetics and ecological conservation are discussed. I agreed (Petersen, 2025) that there is more to wonder than I address in my book and that building a ritual around Gaia based on science may suffer from exactly the same problem as the one Sideris has identified more generally for mythopoeticized science.

6. Evaluation

Philosophically, Transcendental Naturalism aims to represent a major intervention in what might be termed metamodern metatheory—the attempt to move beyond both Enlightenment certainty and postmodern skepticism toward renewed, pragmatic engagement with the limits of knowledge and the real work of value-creation. Its most important contribution is its refusal to marginalize uncertainty, wonder, judgment, and values from the account of what counts as “natural.” Instead of seeing nature as disenchanted or values as mere projections, Transcendental Naturalism makes them central components of human (and perhaps nonhuman) experience and action.

In metatheoretical terms, Transcendental Naturalism contributes by reframing epistemology (it challenges foundationalist assumptions and introduces a layered model of knowledge that includes science, values, and existential meaning), emphasizing methodological pluralism (it encourages multiple modes of inquiry—scientific, spiritual, poetic—without collapsing them into one dominant paradigm), embracing uncertainty (especially relevant to climate science, Transcendental Naturalism embraces uncertainty not as a flaw but as a feature of human understanding, pushing metatheory to account for ambiguity and provisional knowledge), and integrating normativity (it brings judgment and values into the metatheoretical conversation). In short, Transcendental Naturalism is a metatheoretical intervention that expands the boundaries of what counts as legitimate knowledge and how we relate to the natural world. Its potency has especially been shown in fields like climate science, where facts, values, and existential stakes collide.

Transcendental Naturalism invites a critical, reflective, non-dogmatic approach that can channel both scientific rigor and philosophical humility, especially vital in complex, pluralistic societies faced with planetary challenges. Nevertheless, by disallowing metaphysical closure, it leaves to participants the work of specifying how value domains and metaphysical options can be explored in practice—a task that remains open for future philosophical, cultural, and cross-disciplinary development.

7. Conclusion

Transcendental Naturalism stands at the forefront of a pragmatic and realistic approach to integrative philosophy. It posits that uncertainty, judgment, and value are constitutive of our best practices—scientific, religious, ethical, and political. By keeping possibilities open, respecting the plurality of ultimate questions, and refusing to “solve” uncertainty through certainty, it offers a robust template for future philosophical engagement in a time of crisis and transformation. Its hope is not for final systems, but for ongoing thinking together across irreducible difference, grounded in wonder, and dedicated to the betterment of the planetary community.