Santiago Zabala Signs from the Future: A Philosophy of Warnings Columbia University Press 256 pages, 5.5 x 8.5 inches ISBN: 9780231221726
Santiago Zabala
On Signs from the Future: A Philosophy of Warnings
Interview of
December 1, 2025
In a nutshell
This book explores the importance of warnings, our tendency to ignore them, and strategies to address this critical issue. I believe the 21st century is characterized by a widespread failure to heed warnings from historians, sociologists, or scientists. Decades ago, for example, we were warned about pandemic influenza, the rise of far-right populism, and the dangers of AI. But why didn’t we listen? The answer isn’t just due to inaccurate data or fake news, as many think. It’s more complex. The most interesting part of warnings isn’t just how indifferent we’ve become—climate change being a prime example—but also that we often overlook the deeper questions about warnings themselves. This is the first book to outline a “philosophy of warnings.” Some may see this as a new philosophy, but like warnings, it has existed for centuries. Philosophers have been warning us about Being, God, or Death since Heraclitus. Now, it’s necessary to develop a systematic philosophy of warnings because of our current inability to respond to the most obvious ones. The book is divided into three parts. In the first, I discuss four notable philosophical warnings: Friedrich Nietzsche’s “God is dead,” Martin Heidegger’s “science does not think,” Simone de Beauvoir’s “one becomes a woman,” and Hannah Arendt’s “the banality of evil.” The second part shows how we’ve ignored these warnings, as seen in the resurgence of fundamentalism, along with the dangers of AI, the anti-gender movement, and the use of automated weapons. Finally, the last part emphasizes listening and interpretation as essential skills we need to learn. The book also includes examples from popular culture, such as TV series, novels, and movies like “Don’t Look Up” or “The Zone of Interest.” In fact, Jonathan Glazer referred to his film as a warning in an interview with Rolling Stone.
The wide angle
Signs from the Future originates from my earlier works—Why Only Art Can Save Us: Aesthetics and the Absence of Emergency (2017), and Being at Large: Freedom in the Age of Alternative Facts (2020). In these books, I developed an emergency theory proposing that our greatest crisis is the lack of emergencies. This doesn’t mean there are no emergencies; rather, the most urgent issues—climate change, economic inequality, ongoing genocides—are often overlooked. Governments no longer need to declare a state of exception (as Giorgio Agamben argued); they can simply ignore these urgent crises. This was especially evident during the pandemic, since Donald Trump never declared a state of emergency. Closer examination reveals that many politicians who dismiss major emergencies are also the ones dismissing warnings. Trump, Javier Milei, and other far-right populists are quick to discredit and defund warning institutions. But why? In my opinion, this problem isn't limited to these politicians but runs deep within our culture. Many thinkers, scientists, and even philosophers believe we should replace traditional sources of legitimacy—those that once helped us interpret warnings—with a “transparent realism without authority.” The issue is that warnings don’t rely solely on reality or objectivity because they aim to influence the present, not just shape the future. Whether a warning becomes reality is secondary to the strength and pressure it exerts.
A close-up
I hope that readers who are simply browsing the book will immediately recognize the difference between “philosophical warnings” and “trigger warnings.” While the latter aims to alert students and viewers to traumatic educational or media content, the former signals the existential consequences of ignoring these alerts. This explains why Greta Thunberg plays such a central role in the book. If she has managed to warn us more effectively than scientists, it’s not just because she humanized the climate crisis like few others—by going on strike and calling out numerous politicians whose inaction endangered our future—but mainly because she has changed our view of scientific warnings. When she questions the cultural belief that adults should teach children, she highlights that “adult knowledge” is no longer enough; it has become outdated and needs replacing. That’s why her call to panic is aimed at “normal” people—those who never skip school and are never forced to face an emergency. If “trigger warnings” protect us from emergencies, “philosophical warnings” draw us into awareness of absent emergencies—that is, warnings. The future will belong to warnings, or it will not exist at all.
Lastly
In sum, warnings, contrary to predictions, are not meant to persuade anyone. They are meant to pressure us into changing the present, which is heading in a dangerous direction. That is why I refer to them as signs from the future. However, the future of warnings differs from that of predictions. While predictions require us to submit—there is nothing we can do once we are told the virus has spread—warnings invite us to change that future because the virus will spread unless we act now. That’s why the French word “avenir” fits better to describe the future of warnings. Warnings point to what is to come (“a venir”), an unpredictable event we must be ready to listen to and interpret. The image I chose as the cover for this book is "Compound Eye," a sculpture by American artist Graham Caldwell; it’s a fitting illustration of what warnings are, as well as what makes them. As we approach the sculpture, the horizon seen through the mirrors widens, creating a sense of pressure that calls for a response. The different sizes of the mirrors demand that we interpret what they reflect, since what they reveal is never an objective view of reality. If we imagine a “politics of warnings,” its main concern would not be facts, truths, or the future that make up a warning, but rather the pressure we can exert to change the present. The political nature of warnings calls for practices—from philosophers, filmmakers, and journalists, among others—that are somehow more comprehensive, even if they produce fewer immediate political results.
