<p>Contemporary debates on technological futures are marked by disputes over epistemic authority and normative legitimacy—over what counts as responsible anticipation, relevant knowledge, or legitimate critique. This article shifts analytical attention to the epistemic–affective orientations through which technological hope and critique acquire normative force in such debates, shaping how uncertainty is framed and how responses to technological change come to appear credible, excessive, or irresponsible. In doing so, it reveals how science-based expertise legitimizes certain paths forward while marginalizing others. The article conceptualizes these patterned assumptions as asymmetrically structured forms of techno-optimism and techno-pessimism: socially distributed epistemic–affective orientations through which affirmative and critical relations to technological futures are articulated. To account for their persistence and internal diversity, the article situates contemporary techno-orientations within enduring Enlightenment and Romantic repertoires, treated as overlapping and selectively mobilized cultural traditions rather than fixed worldviews. On this basis, the article develops a fourfold typology distinguishing Enlightenment and Romantic variants of both techno-optimism and techno-pessimism. The typology functions as a diagnostic lens for examining how different forms of technological hope and critique acquire epistemic authority and normative legitimacy across scientific, policy, and innovation contexts. By clarifying the epistemic and affective grammars through which technological futures are evaluated, the article contributes to broader debates on the authority, legitimacy, and contestability of science-based futures, and supports more reflexive engagements with technological hope and skepticism attentive to how reason and affect jointly shape what futures become thinkable, governable, and desirable.</p>