Internal Deliberation Defending Climate-Harmful Behavior

Abstract Most people in countries with the highest climate impact per capita are well aware of crisis and do not deny science. They worry about have engaged attitudes. Still, their greenhouse-gas emissions often high. How can we understand acting contrary to our knowledge? A simple answer is that want give up on benefits or compromise quality life. However, it painful live discrepancies between knowledge action. To be able avoid taking consequences knowledge, deal gap by motivating ourselves action still acceptable. In this article, use topical analysis examine such processes motivation looking at internal deliberation 399 people’s accounts reasoning when against own knowledge. We found these described least four different ways which call rationalization, legitimization, justification imploration. By focusing topoi make visible how individual forms interact culturally developed values, habits assumptions creating enthymemes. believe insights contribute understanding conditions for transition communication.