Foreword: Just My Opinion™
Pessimists are creatives who are able to see the worst possible outcomes. To me, this means we have people who are able to effectively sound the alarm, and it’s worth at least listening to what they have to say.
I feel Pessimism is shunned nowadays because it comes close enough to Realism so as to be uncomfortably familiar, as what we’re seeing unfold is one of the worst potentialities we had at our disposal (I think most if not all of us agree that we couldn’t have anticipated a dystopia THIS fucking stupid).
In a healthy society, however, one in which things work in favour of the citizens and every soul has the necessities of life assured, Pessimism would serve as a cautionary element. It would demonstrate the disasters we’re avoiding or will have to avoid.
I feel this has always been its role, from Ancient Greek Tragedies to contemporary dystopian sci-fi, but somewhere along the way it became something to be avoided like the plague (see Toxic Optimism/Positivism).
I would argue that pessimism, like optimism, is too hobbled by an inability to see clearly the arguments of the other side. Realism seems a better way to go, and if that happens to look bleak then well, that still does not make it actual pessimism.
But that was my point exactly, Pessimism isn’t meant to fully replace awareness of reality. It, just as Optimism, is a Hypothetical at the end of the day, whereas I’d argue Realism, i.e. the ability to see things for what they are is a Concrete. Not even the same conceptual class from where I’m standing.
Edit: to add, I’d argue neither Pessimism nor Optimism can exist without a basis in Realism. Optimism is what I wish reality would be, Pessimism is what I fear reality could be. Without a pre-existing Realistic perception, both would be nothing but unrelated delirium, and then we’d be talking about something else entirely.
2+2=4
2+2=3 is too small, i.e. wrong in the direction of being too small
2+2=5 is too wrong in the direction of being too large
Likewise, optimism is wrong in being too hopeful, pessimism is wrong in being too fearful.
What you said though is that:
So being wrong is a vital component of being right? It is an issue with the phrasing. It is not “pessimism” that is necessary, but a willingness to look at the things that may cause us fear - though your phrasing indicated that pessimism itself was the necessary component, which is what I disagreed with.
I see what you’re saying, but perspective is not equatable to a math equation. An optimist and a pessimist can both have a complete understanding of the facts, but one predicts that things will get better, and the other predicts that things will get worse, and eventually, given enough time, they’ll both be right.
There is no such thing as a realist. That’s just what someone calls themselves when they don’t realize that their perspective is flawed and unique to themselves.
deleted by creator
Sure, if you want to neglect the value of trying to picture a better and a worse.
Honestly, you seem to have a problem with Pessimism itself by default, in which case there’s nothing more I can say here.
And, to answer your question, how does one learn if not by first being wrong about things?