I value your balanced view of Gates' philanthropy, it speaks to how I think, and there's indeed room for myself to grow from my cynical ways.
With that said, is there a constructive lens of cynicism? We've seen decades of hero-worship about corporate figures, and there is a risk that we let charity eclipse accountability. Perhaps cynicism serves to highlight needed scrutiny of business leaders' as wealth gaps grow.
(Though I may just be rationalizing my own cynicism at this point.)
I don't think cynicism can be constructive, it is destructive by nature. And "constructive cynicism" almost translates to skepticism for me. Both cynicism and skepticism begin with doubt, but the difference is what they do with it. I remember reading this quote somewhere: "Cynicism is doubt with a grudge. Skepticism is doubt with curiosity."
Cynicism wants to be right. Skepticism wants to be less wrong over time.
Cynicism assumes bad intent and shortcuts the thinking process. Skepticism suspends judgement until evidence is more conclusive.
Your comment about highlighting the needed scrutiny of business leaders' as wealth gaps grows sounds like skepticism to me. You aren't saying that as wealth gaps grow business leaders become necessarily bad. You're saying we should be more careful about how we view their actions.
If anything, cynicism too often lets people off the hook, because it already assumes everything is corrupt and unfixable. "Of course they're doing it for selfish reasons, what did you expect?"
Skepticism leaves the door open: "What's the real motive here? What can we verify? What action follows from this knowledge?" That's work. It's uncomfortable. But it's also useful.
Shields, armors, 2FA's, passwords, walls and gates are useful but because the are constructive but because they are protective. To blindly assume the best in everyone would set one up for exploitation, which we see more and more of in this world
Protection measures like shields, armor, and password aren't rooted in cynicism any more than umbrellas are rooted in a hatred for the sky. They're rooted in observed evidence (realism or pragmatism). It's more like, "some people are bad, therefore we should protect ourselves."
Cynicism doesn’t just acknowledge risk, it condemns everything by default. Cynicism would go one step further (reg. protection): "Well obviously, everyone’s a thief. No one can be trusted. Humanity is trash."
Realism is situational. "Some people are bad."
Cynicism is more sweeping. "Rich people are evil."
Jumped right into #10 after seeing you in Office Hours today. I appreciate your clear definitions and contrasting, as well as the way you lay out this potentially confusing topic. I will go back to your first posts to get up to speed and look forward to your upcoming longer piece.
Thank you, Laurie! I’m really happy that you thought the writing was clear. Being clear, and not confusing, is one of the main things I try to focus on.
Hey, this was great to read. A fresh new topic and excellently written. It's a good way to get people to make a shift from negativity to having a better outlook, which can be mentally difficult and requires taking one step at a time. I would much rather approach things with skepticism than cynicism, which, given the world around us, has been my fallback habit. Good work. Looking forward to reading the rest.
I value your balanced view of Gates' philanthropy, it speaks to how I think, and there's indeed room for myself to grow from my cynical ways.
With that said, is there a constructive lens of cynicism? We've seen decades of hero-worship about corporate figures, and there is a risk that we let charity eclipse accountability. Perhaps cynicism serves to highlight needed scrutiny of business leaders' as wealth gaps grow.
(Though I may just be rationalizing my own cynicism at this point.)
I don't think cynicism can be constructive, it is destructive by nature. And "constructive cynicism" almost translates to skepticism for me. Both cynicism and skepticism begin with doubt, but the difference is what they do with it. I remember reading this quote somewhere: "Cynicism is doubt with a grudge. Skepticism is doubt with curiosity."
Cynicism wants to be right. Skepticism wants to be less wrong over time.
Cynicism assumes bad intent and shortcuts the thinking process. Skepticism suspends judgement until evidence is more conclusive.
Your comment about highlighting the needed scrutiny of business leaders' as wealth gaps grows sounds like skepticism to me. You aren't saying that as wealth gaps grow business leaders become necessarily bad. You're saying we should be more careful about how we view their actions.
If anything, cynicism too often lets people off the hook, because it already assumes everything is corrupt and unfixable. "Of course they're doing it for selfish reasons, what did you expect?"
Skepticism leaves the door open: "What's the real motive here? What can we verify? What action follows from this knowledge?" That's work. It's uncomfortable. But it's also useful.
Shields, armors, 2FA's, passwords, walls and gates are useful but because the are constructive but because they are protective. To blindly assume the best in everyone would set one up for exploitation, which we see more and more of in this world
Protection measures like shields, armor, and password aren't rooted in cynicism any more than umbrellas are rooted in a hatred for the sky. They're rooted in observed evidence (realism or pragmatism). It's more like, "some people are bad, therefore we should protect ourselves."
Cynicism doesn’t just acknowledge risk, it condemns everything by default. Cynicism would go one step further (reg. protection): "Well obviously, everyone’s a thief. No one can be trusted. Humanity is trash."
Realism is situational. "Some people are bad."
Cynicism is more sweeping. "Rich people are evil."
I don't think cynicism is necessarily sweeping
I think I agree that sweeping might be too strong, but cynicism does have an “overreach.” It condemns more than is justified.
Perhaps we each interpret the word "cynicism" differently.
Jumped right into #10 after seeing you in Office Hours today. I appreciate your clear definitions and contrasting, as well as the way you lay out this potentially confusing topic. I will go back to your first posts to get up to speed and look forward to your upcoming longer piece.
Thank you, Laurie! I’m really happy that you thought the writing was clear. Being clear, and not confusing, is one of the main things I try to focus on.
Hey, this was great to read. A fresh new topic and excellently written. It's a good way to get people to make a shift from negativity to having a better outlook, which can be mentally difficult and requires taking one step at a time. I would much rather approach things with skepticism than cynicism, which, given the world around us, has been my fallback habit. Good work. Looking forward to reading the rest.
Hey, Yamuna. Really glad you liked it! Not wanting to always fall back into cynicism was a big reason for writing this for me. Thanks!