Most people claim to be realists these days. The rest seem to prefer to be called optimists. No one wants to be called a pessimist.
That's dumb. For one thing I don't think anyone is one of these things all the time. Seems to me it would be unhealthy to be one of these all the time.
But as a society, I generally think realism is the least useful. It isn't so much a mix of optimism and pessimism as kind of a devotion to expected occurrences, usually based on historical patterns rather than science. Plus most people who call themselves realists are delusional.
Optimism and pessimism have their good points and bad and I think balance is necessary. But we obsess over the wonders of optimism, often ignoring its bad qualities (unless you're one of those delusionals claiming to be a realist, but then you just say the problem is its unrealistic- LAME!) So true our pessimism is often misdirected into self-loathing or self-pity. That's when it's at its worse.

The benefit of pessimism is that it is the foundation of morality and decency and all the things that give us something to be optimistic about. When we perceive suffering and we realize it can happen to us, we feel empathy. Empathy is the main thing necessary for what we call human decency.
Optimism unfettered is a denial of the plausibility of suffering. While this can sometimes lead to good things, if it occurs too much it creates ignorance of suffering and the death of empathy. Thus immorality. Indecency.
Plus too much optimism leads to the above-mentioned corruption of pessimism. The pessimist becomes centered on his or her own troubles as he or she is surrounded by blissfully ignorant optimists. The result is a further death of empathy.

I'd say that our balance is way off and the only way it's going to return is either through an extreme conscious collective want to restore humanity or through a terrible catastrophe that shatters the lives of pretty much every area of the country. I'm hoping for the former. I'm not 100%sure the latter would work anyway.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

I'm always pessimistic, probably because I have depression but never mania. To be honest, though, anyone who examines society, the world and the universe can't help being pessimistic. What I see are people suffering too much to help others or even to understand others, mutual social parasitism and people living to survive. If we are here for any purpose, it is to suffer, and society is no more than collective suffering.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

That's where balance is necessary.
We should be able to see suffering in ourselves and others but not feel powerless to get rid of it.

Unfortunately it often seems that we instead ignore the suffering because we feel it is impossible to stop it.

Maybe I have it backwards. Seems like a chicken and egg thing.

Which comes first the blind optimism that leads to hopeless, self-centered pessimism or the hopeless pessimism that leads to blissfully ignorant optimism?
Either way, once it starts, the cycle is hard to break.
And now that I think about it, it isn't so much a balance that is necessary. The negative version is also a balance. I suppose it's a positive balance of pessimism and optimism that is required.
That explains why realism sucks. Realism is the negative balance.
Weird.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

It is highly suggestive of what awaits our society that economists in the 1920's who warned of an impending crisis were considered un-American. In reply to your last post, I think many people hide from how terrible the world is because they can't deal with it. They become irrational optimists as a defense mechanism.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

I think what makes it weird is that they are cynical optimists.
My original point is starting to make less sense to me as the plot thickens. Perhaps what we have is a typology... pessimism and optimism on one axis, cynicism and whatever its opposite is on the other.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

Typically, when talking about optimism and pessimism, we talk about people's philosophies for handling uncertanities.. They both are highly simplified models, the other encouraging risk-taking and the other playing safe.. The benefit of each model depends highly of the situation.. They are far from something ideal and I see them simply as mental short cuts to avoid facing the massive complexity and uncertanity associated in predicting the future..

Over all, I say, that when talking about optimism and pessimism, one should not forget this nature of simplification and their inability to face the unavoidable uncertainies.. They are both simplified models of though and they should be treated as such..

You should not be suprised, if I fail to understand your antipathy against realism.. You say that the realists have a tendency of looking to historical data and making predictions based upon it.. Still - assuming the continuity of the past regularities - is the only way to make any meaningful predictions.. Let them have massive uncertainities.. Let the predictions be vague.. Accepting the uncertanities is still the only way to advance in this territory of future, which is - fundamentally - uncertain and vague..

Overall, the goal is not some utopistic perfection in the world view, but the deepening understanding of reality, the development of methodologies and increased accuracy in predictions..

Also from the pragmatical view, the benefits of realism - as opposed to pessimism/optimism - is its ability to prepare for the worst and aim for the best.. The fruits of the realism are harvested as the fruits of the improved decision making ~ avoiding the catastrophies associated with the risk-ignoring optimism and still providing the necessary courage that is fundamentally lacking in the pessimism..


As a side note I would like to emphatize the nature uncertainity.. I would say that the true realist understand one might be wrong and - basing on any limited knowledge - there is more than one possible future, or even more than one possible reality.. I would emphatize a certain kind of humility before the reality.. Accepting that how little we actually know and understand..

This might not be something, that is very visible in my writings.. I tend to make conclusions with rather limited information, and certainly I have been wrong before and I will be wrong in the future.. Being wrong is my fundamental right and I value it highly.. Still, I have my own style of making conclusions.. The problem in the politics is that we have only limited information and the little information we have is often spinned and manipulated.. If you want to make any conclusions, you need intellectual courage.. And at least I am ready to take the risk of being wrong as opposed to being apathic and paralyzed by the existing uncertainities..

To conclude.. The Prussian Field-Marshal von Moltke ones said: "No plan survives the enemy contact.." He emphasized the ability to face all the possible options and events, and the deep preparation for anything that might happen..

(BTW.. Did you refer to me when you considered some realists delusional?)

- BtD

__________________
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]

I think my antipathy to realism is hat I think it is relative... and therefore not realism. While optimism and pessimism are simplistic poles, at least one understands the relativism of their view when passing this judgement. Realism is self-concealing.
That and I think most self-described realists, not all, tend to be on what I called the negative balance of optimism and pessimism or alternately cynical optimism. Others might be the opposite.

This philosophy is a work in progress and I'm not sure I've figured out how to describe it yet. Forgive me for confusing myself (it's one of my favorite activities).
I'm not so sure you're any more delusional than the average human. I just think realism in general is a delusion.

__________________
That information is classified and to be given only on a need-to-know basis...

And I do not need to know.

I would say that of the optimism, pessimism and realism, the realism is the most difficult art.. The difficulty of realism explains well, why there are so many different kinds of realismm.. Even more it explains, why lot of the 'realism' is so unrealistic..

To be realistic, you should have a deep understanding of the reality and even more - you should be honest for others and youself.. It demands remaining free of bias and wishful thinking.. In this way, it requires not only effort and intelligence, but also the right attitude.. And I would say that the right combination of the three is rather rare..

I'm not suprised, if you find it disturbing, when people try to sell their delusions under the realism.. But in this case, it is not the realism you are angry about.. You are angry at the dishonesty associated with the biased people calling themselves realists..

Heh.. Well - pondering things in one's mind is not only entertaining, but sometimes it leads to valuable insights.. I'm afraid I'm guilty of doing some wondering myself..

To be honest, I find your thought stimulating and interesting.. Overall, I say

- BtD

__________________
"Freedom is the freedom to say that two plus two make four. If that is granted, all else follows."
[George Orwell, 1984]