Editorial

As I have already mentioned in a previous editorial, the theme of Risk, shared with the psychoanalytic journal Psyche, inspires the cover image, characterising the current year, which represents the Greek myth of Icarus. Upon reading and exploring the collected works in this issue, I had a sense of disorientation and satisfaction at the same time.

The papers correspond adequately to the idea that I, together with the entire editorial team, envisioned when planning the monographic issue. Each contribution, in its own way, addresses the subject by delving into a topic with a specific slant while maintaining connections to broader aspects. In this sense the organisation of this issue reflects a coherent structure. However, despite the space devoted to the theme of risk here, it feels – as often happens in these cases – that very complex perspectives and themes have opened up, thereby leaving room for further explorations. In short, we have a few more tools for reflection, but – as was to be expected and wished for – the issue has raised more questions than it answers.

Moreover, as proposed by some of the authors in this publication, the term risk encompasses several components, including caesura, indeterminacy and unpredictability, as suggested by its etymology.

As proposed by Ulrich Beck in his significant article, the concept of risk has acquired a global dimension, encompassing a prevailing state of mind of expectation and anticipation of catastrophe. This perspective situates risk in the future. However, risk is not to be equated with catastrophe, since risk, through its anticipation, serves as a form of forewarning, whereas catastrophe refers to the occurrence of disastrous events in the present resulting from severe critical life conditions and the environmental situation. From this standpoint the mental, emotional, and cognitive components of risk actually stand outside of time and, to some extent, beyond historical and social contexts. On the other hand, Beck's co