Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Are you a Cynic or a Realist?


panthers55

Recommended Posts

http://www.michaelteachings.com/cynic_attitude.html

 

Many people on this board when accused of negative attitudes say they are a cynic or a realist.  Here is an article which discusses both and where they differ. Yeah it is a little esoteric and touchy feely but it describes the categories well. 

 

In a nutshell Cynics are negative, argumentative and believe that like Murphy, whatever can go wrong will go wrong.  They focus on the attitude that :if you are going to do it at least do it in the way that you can least screw it up.

In its best form cynics are the devil's advocate always pointing to the exception to the rule. They love to bicker and argue and contradict everything.  They enjoy causing friction and going against the rule.  In its negative form they can be destructive sadistic and hurtful.  They have few friends and often enjoy that since they sneer at popularity. Their biggest fear is being led along the primrose path.

 

The complement of the  cynic is the realist. Realist don't try to interpret things or find fault they accept things as they appear for what they are. Cynics are quick to point out the flaws in others while realists aren't. Realists are innovative and creative while cynics aren't. They go along with others, living life as it occurs without extreme comment or interpretation. Realists are more likely to say it is what it is. (I put that in there)

 

If a cynic and realist are discussing something the cynic will be brief and negative, the realist will be verbose and positive. Where cynics see what is  wrong with the world, realists simply see what is there.

 

How does this relate to the huddle and football?  Most of the negative posters here are cynics who  see the negative and enjoy the bickering and fighting. Contrary to what they believe, they are not realists who are typically positive and accepting.  A  cynic says the offense sucks  and it is Shula's fault, the players fault, Rivera's fault and it won't get better. A realist says we scored 7 points, ran the ball for 100 yards but made mistakes and turnovers. They don't place blame or overly evaluate. They tend to see things from many sides and perspectives. They remain open to the idea that things will change and invite it. Cynics are liked primarily by other cynics but not by most  other posters here. They are often called trolls.  Realists tend to stick with facts and form opinions based on facts according to an evolving point of view.  Cynics have an agenda, realist's don't.  Cynics view the world through their negatively colored lenses. Realists allow the world to color their perspective. 

 

 

While no one is 100% one way or the other, which side do you fall on most of the time??  Btw, if you argue with the definitions or try to find exceptions to these, you are a cynic. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More realist than cynic.  However I tend to become argumentative when I see something I think is unjust.  Especially the cherry picking of stats, articles, pictures and videos.

 

 

 

Now I'm thinking does this post make you a cynic because you believe argumentative people must be cynics? Or are you just a realist for pointing it out?  Or maybe because you are a cynic that you think other cynics are at fault?  Hmmm..

 

 

Does the fact that I question your post make me a cynic?  Or am I a realist because I'm pointing it out? 

 

 

Or just maybe it's 1am, and I'm kind of high an am thinking about this too much..........

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No such thing as a realist. Things are more black and white because the future is not real. There are many different paths that could happen yet only one that ultimately does happen. this makes being a realist nearly impossible. anyone who ckaims to be a realist who predictscthe future is full of poo. Just a pessimist or skeptic.being a "realist" more of a convenience for coming out after the fact saying "i told you so."

I'm cautiously optimistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a realist who reserves the right to be cynical, especially when history, truth,  and/or the reality of a situation compels me to speak out and/or act against injustice and/or unbridled negativity.  

 

:sword:

 

Edit: Some people label others cynics as a means to justify the status quo, lull them into a state of apathy, or manipulate others to keep their opinions to themselves (which is basically a means of control and/or peer pressure).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

More realist than cynic.  However I tend to become argumentative when I see something I think is unjust.  Especially the cherry picking of stats, articles, pictures and videos.

 

 

 

Now I'm thinking does this post make you a cynic because you believe argumentative people must be cynics? Or are you just a realist for pointing it out?  Or maybe because you are a cynic that you think other cynics are at fault?  Hmmm..

 

 

Does the fact that I question your post make me a cynic?  Or am I a realist because I'm pointing it out? 

 

 

Or just maybe it's 1am, and I'm kind of high an am thinking about this too much..........

As I said at the end of the postnmost folks are not 100% one way or the other butthey tend to be more one than the other. Questioning the validity of the article makes you a cynic. On the other hand being cynically at times keeps you from being gullible. The realnissue is do you question everything and enjoy pointing out the negatives or are you generally an accepting person who sometimes goes contrarian
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a realist who reserves the right to be cynical, especially when history, truth,  and/or the reality of a situation compels me to speak out and/or act against injustice and/or unbridled negativity.  

 

:sword:

 

Edit: Some people label others cynics as a means to justify the status quo, lull them into a state of apathy, or manipulate others to keep their opinions to themselves (which is basically a means of control and/or peer pressure).

No you are not a realist by the definition above. You by the very nature of what you wrote you are a cynic.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Give me Mitchell Evans over T Sanders in this run heavy offense any day of the week. 
    • What's up gents, the OGs remember me, the guy who single-handedly gave the Panthers the greatest uniform in history moniker. Not too long after that I got involved with Pro Football Focus (pre-Collinsworth acquisition) and ended up taking backseat here to preserve some objectivity. But from a distance I noticed a lot. After the end of the Cam era this place devolved into the most un-fun, petty, negative cesspool of whining and bitching that has ever graced the internet. The worst part of it all is that the level of discussion turned into the most ill-informed, hot-take, unnuanced crap, rife with people talking out of their posteriors as if they have any clue about what they are watching. Once you get into the professional side of the sport and actual film rooms, you start to understand there's an absurd number of moving parts to pretty much every snap and the details you are privy to are truly only half the picture. The absolute most important thing I learned from being part of professional level football analysis is that quarterbacking is literally the most intricate and difficult position in all of professional sports, and that the NFL itself is struggling to develop any workable model that allows them to understand what makes one succeed vs what makes one fail. Because of this paradox it has also made the quarterback position itself grossly overvalued from a fan and media standpoint, creating an absurd fixation on the results delivered by a single player who has to rely on the contributions of everyone around them. This also drives the dreaded inflation of QB salaries that inevitably cause even elite teams to lose key talent all to pour cash into the one player supposed to be able to single-handedly elevate the entire team (and defense and special teams and coaching and ownership by some mysterious proxy), yet without those same players even talented teams can wander the wilderness searching for the right guy to take advantage of their talent window. The discussions the last few years around Bryce has personified this insanity, as this board has devolved into some sort of electronic civil war between the hyperbolic Young supporters and the vitriolic Bryce haters. The reality, like practically everything in this world, is somewhere in the middle. He has traits that can absolutely elevate a team with creativity, play recognition, off-arm angle throws, mental toughness, etc. He's also physically limited, with mostly "good-enough" qualities for most situations that a professional quarterback is asked to do, and will never be an overpowering physical force like pre-injury Cam. But "good-enough" physicality represents a large majority of championship-winning quarterbacks, even in the modern era. There's a reason the corpse of Peyton Manning took the chip from elite physical specimen Cam, because the team surrounding him was talented enough to get him there, while we all know Cam was the driving force of that 2015 team. That's no knock on him, that's just how the game of football tends to work: the more complete team usually wins. The summary is this: if this team lives or dies solely on the performance of its quarterback, then it is absolutely a paper tiger even if he plays brilliantly week in and out. There are no superheroes in this sport, there are only conduits that proxy the collective efforts of much of the team around them. And no one alive can tell you how the position is played perfectly, it's all a confluence of circumstance and what unique collection of traits each player brings to the position, which can never be truly recreated season after season, even for the same player on the same team. If this place remains a raging hellscape of idiotic hot takes I will happily remove myself again and do something more productive for yet another decade, but maybe's there hope that we can all get back to the old adage, and keep pounding.
    • Really impressed how the bottom six have looked the past couple games
×
×
  • Create New...