CRITICISM. #2

    Now! Let's consider what criticism is and amidst varieties of criticism, we'd focus on four which are positive and negative, and constructive and destructive criticism:

                   POSITIVE CRITICISM.

    This form of criticism intends to serve a purpose that is constructive, or that the targeted person would approve of as it pulls attention to a good or positive aspect of something that is being ignored or disregarded.

    The basic aim of positive criticism is usually to provide a better orientation, or frame of reference, for behavior. It provides ideas people can act on to enhance the situation. At the very least, it provides more choices for behavior, and therefore potentially enlarges behavioral freedom.

     This criticism can be stated as a positive alternative as it does not necessarily say, that the option criticized is all bad, but rather that an alternative option is promising, or preferable.

                  NEGATIVE CRITICISM.

    This means voicing an objection to something, only to show that it is wrong, false, mistaken, objectionable, etc. That may not have been the intention, but it can be interpreted that way.

     This criticism can have the effect that the people criticized feel attacked or insulted by it, so they either do not take it seriously or react badly to it. The downside of negative criticism is, often, that it tells people what they cannot or should not achieve, rather than telling them what they can or should do. So it may be disabling, rather than enabling.

   The upside of negative criticism is that it can explain what the limitations of an idea, an action, or a situation are, for the sake of being realistic as it may be necessary at times, to the prevention of a course of action harmful to the people concerned. If people are afraid to state negative criticism, the existing problem might get worse.

                    CONSTRUCTIVE CRITICISM.

      This aims to show that intent or purpose of something is better served by an alternative approach for it often suggests improvement – how things could be done better or more acceptably. They draw attention to how an identified problem could be solved, or how it could be solved better. Constructive criticism is more likely accepted if the criticism is timely, clear, specific, detailed, and actionable.

      Both negative and constructive criticism have their appropriate uses, but often it is considered a requirement of criticism that they are combined. Thus, it is often considered that those who find fault with something should also offer an option for putting it right.

    So, to orient behaviour, people need to know both what is "ruled in" and what is "ruled out". If the criticism concerns only one aspect, but not the other, it may supply only incomplete information, which is not adequate to orient behaviour or guide action. One of the most elementary reasons why a rule is ignored, flouted, or subverted is because either the positive or the negative aspect of what it means is unspecified.     

                       DESTRUCTIVE CRITICISM.

     This aims to destroy the target of criticism. The aim is to show that the point of view of someone else has no validity at all, or lacks any merit. However, in some contexts, destructive criticisms may be essential to save resources or save lives in one's group. An idea in itself is not dangerous, but an idea proposed in a particular context can be very dangerous so people feel that it should be disarmed by mercilessly criticizing it. 

    The term "destructive criticism" is also used to mean that the level, scope, or intensity of criticism is such, that it becomes mainly destructive. In this context, people believe that the criticism is so great, or there is so much criticism, that it only destroys things. For example, a debate or controversy can get out of control, so that everybody is at war or opposed to everybody else. In that case, it may well be that the criticism is being overdone. What started as a structured dialogue to identify conflicting aspects of a situation, ends up as chaos in which nobody can agree with anyone else anymore.

      Destructive criticism from parents and other authority figures causes psychological harm to children that results in lower levels of self-esteem, social acceptance, scholastic competence, behavioral conduct, global self-worth, and generally poorer self-perception.

     Having considered these forms of criticism, I believe knowing how to handle criticism is very crucial. Then ,the next release on criticism (#3) covers that.

Thank you!