In this day and age, skepticism is arguably less of a virtue and more so a tool of sorts to poke holes in anything that threatens the status quo.
My mind has this stereotypical image of a skeptic as the person in a group who drags everyone else down to Earth whenever they dream of reaching the stars, so to speak.
I think this was developed via observing that there's always a naysayer in the room, hence assigning them the role of a skeptic makes total sense.
But digging a layer deep, I try to know where the skepticism is coming from, whether it's founded or not. People have a subtle way of projecting their own FUDs onto other people's plans, which could be a blend of both genuine concern and personal limitation.
Don't even realize they're doing it for the most part. They think they're being helpful, rational, protecting you from making a mistake. But what they're really doing is protecting themselves from having to confront their own choices.
If you succeed at something they were too afraid to try, it holds up a mirror they'd rather not look into. So the skepticism becomes a defense mechanism dressed up as wisdom.
The tricky part is separating useful caution from borrowed doubt.
The one who tried and failed will either warn you away from their mistakes or simply assume you'll repeat them. Where as someone who's never taken a risk will unsurprisingly see risk everywhere.
But there's a third type too, the person who never tried at all but has convinced themselves they already know the outcome and these are often the loudest skeptics because they have the most to prove, mostly to themselves.
Moral high ground
I've noticed this pattern play out in different contexts. Some of those who've gone the conventional path like my cousin always have subtle and not so subtle ways at jabbing into my unconventional path.
I get the part about having visible rewards to parade as a form of achievement/success but then examining the foundation from which such a built gives me the impression that he's only a few economic hiccups away from the same uncertainty he mocks me for embracing.
It's rarely about the specific situation.
Good judgement, in this context, is me trying to filter these voices without dismissing them entirely.
There's also the matter of timing and context. Some skepticism comes from a different era entirely, from people applying rules and lessons from a world that doesn't exist anymore.
Old-school investors who missed the tech boom often become the loudest skeptics of anything that sounds too new or different.
The hard part is doing this filtering work without becoming arrogant of sorts with making your point across.
Every now and then, the skeptics can be right. Sometimes you are missing something obvious or confidence is just inexperience in disguise.
It's a balance that only comes from repeatedly making calls, seeing them play out, and honestly examining what you got right and what you got wrong. Then, iterate on the process itself, fine tuning for the better.
Good judgement basically comes from experience, a ton of it, and the willingness to actually learn from it in all its variations.
Thanks for reading!! Share your thoughts below on the comments.
Posted Using INLEO

This is quite an interesting yet thought-provoking post. I love how you described the different types of skeptics and narrowed it down to one key thing - the inability to see beyond their own perspectives.
Genuinely, I believe most times it's an issue of people projecting their individual beliefs and inner self on others without considering nuance, regardless of it being a mirrored situation. However, I think that skepticism is important in a lot of cases in our daily experiences. It keeps us in check of what is and what's not, so it's something to embrace it.
I think your closing has the whole truth in it and it balances out my opinion. Thank you for writing!
Right. I think there is so much noise nowadays which provides enough ground for skepticism to emerge and be prevalent. I like it when there's some FUD in any given situation/course of action, it's more realistic than an outright not going to work! or going to work absolutely! type of instances.
That said, it's indeed quite hard to navigate this in between phases and not have it worked up on one's state of mind/emotions. When immersed in FUD, always zoom out, glance at the past a bit then come back to the present in a different lens before making a decision.
Thanks for stopping by :)
Your reply is upvoted by @topcomment; a manual curation service that rewards meaningful and engaging comments.
More Info - Support us! - Reports - Discord Channel
Congratulations @takhar! You have completed the following achievement on the Hive blockchain And have been rewarded with New badge(s)
Your next target is to reach 14000 upvotes.
You can view your badges on your board and compare yourself to others in the Ranking
If you no longer want to receive notifications, reply to this comment with the word
STOPCheck out our last posts:
Skepticism isn't entirely bad if we don't let it over weigh our sense of reasoning. It becomes a concern when even before trying there's the strong belief the something is going to fail, those kind of people, I like to keep away from if possible.
Right. Those are better not let through the door as they will only sow unjustified FUD into our reasoning. I think sometimes we have to turn off the irrational voices in our head to view the situation more from a rational perspective, this helps reduce unnecessary mistakes.
Thanks for stopping by :)
Thanks for sharing am inspired by your writing, well done
Thanks for stopping by :)