15 ms·
I think I'd prefer cynical skepticism to megalomaniac. It may be a bit stifling at times, but it's also the result of sort of collectively rising a little bit a
by ineedasername 5y ago
I think I'd prefer cynical skepticism to megalomaniac. It may be a bit stifling at times, but it's also the result of sort of collectively rising a little bit above societal Dunning Kruger. We now realize that things are a lot more complex and that the balance in chaotic systems can be a lot more precarious and fragile.
It might be healthy for any large project to have a well informed skeptic in the room telling people it won't work. That person could be wrong, but figuring out how to deal with their projected outcomes can be the difference between success and failure. Or outright disaster.
- rootusrootus 5y ago> well informed skeptic Ah, I found the problem. We have the skeptic, and they effectively stop major projects dead in their tracks, but rarely are they well-informed.
- ineedasername 5y agoYes, that's why I made that stipulation. There are some people that are simply resistant to any change. That can be almost as useful if they're nudged into giving their reasons, but only if they're not in a leadership/decision-making position. An uninformed naysayer with decision making authority will kill just about any initiative.